2021年06月六级第1套仔细阅读 Passage 1 原文翻译及答案解析

Humans are fascinated by the source of their failings and virtues. This preoccupation inevitably leads to an old debate: whether nature or nurture moulds us more. A revolution in genetics has poised this as a modern political question about the character of our society: personalities are hard-wired into our genes' what can governments do to help us? It feels morally questionable, yet claims of genetic selection by intelligence are making headlines.

人类对自身缺陷和美德的来源着迷。这种关注不可避免地引发了一个古老的辩论：是先天还是后天对我们的塑造更大。遗传学的革命已将此定性为关于我们社会特性的现代政治问题：个性是否硬编码于我们的基因中？政府能如何帮助我们？这在道德上令人质疑，然而，关于智力基因选择的宣称正成为头条新闻。

This is down to "hereditarian" (遗传论的) science and a recent paper claimed "differences in exam performance between pupils attending selective and non-selective schools mirror the genetic differences between them". With such an assertion, the work was predictably greeted by a lot of absurd claims about "genetics determining academic success". What the research revealed was the rather less surprising result: the educational benefits of selective schools largely disappear once pupils' inborn ability and socio-economic background were taken into account. It is a glimpse of the blindingly obvious-and there's nothing to back strongly either a hereditary or environmental argument.

这归因于“遗传论”科学，一篇近期论文声称“就读于选拔性学校和非选拔性学校的学生在考试成绩上的差异反映了他们之间的遗传差异”。有了这样的断言，这项研究可预见地引来了许多关于“遗传决定学业成功”的荒谬宣称。研究揭示的结果其实不那么令人惊讶：一旦考虑到学生的先天能力和社会经济背景，选拔性学校的教育益处就基本消失了。这只是对显而易见之事的瞥见——而且没有任何证据能强力支持遗传或环境论点。

Yet the paper does say children are "unintentionally genetically selected" by the school system. Central to hereditarian science is a tall claim: that identifiable variations in genetic sequences can predict an individual's aptness to learn, reason and solve problems. This is problematic on many levels. A teacher could not seriously tell a parent their child has a low genetic tendency to study when external factors clearly exist. Unlike-minded academics say the inheritability of human traits is scientifically unsound. At best there is a weak statistical association and not a causal link between DNA and intelligence. Yet sophisticated statistics are used to create an intimidatory atmosphere of scientific certainty.

然而，论文确实指出儿童被学校系统“无意中进行了基因选择”。遗传论科学的核心是一个夸大的宣称：可识别的基因序列变异能预测个体学习、推理和解决问题的倾向。这在许多层面上都存在问题。教师不能严肃地告诉家长，他们的孩子在学习上基因倾向较低，因为外部因素明显存在。持不同观点的学者认为人类特质的可遗传性在科学上站不住脚。DNA与智力之间充其量只有微弱的统计关联，而非因果联系。然而，复杂的统计方法被用来制造一种科学确定性的威慑氛围。

While there's an undoubted genetic basis to individual difference, it is wrong to think that socially defined groups can be genetically accounted for. The fixation on genes as destiny is surely false too. Medical predictability can rarely be based on DNA alone; the environment matters too. Something as complex as intellect is likely to be affected by many factors beyond genes. If hereditarians want to advance their cause it will require more balanced interpretation and not just acts of advocacy.

虽然个体差异无疑有遗传基础，但认为社会定义的群体可以从基因上解释是错误的。将基因视为命运的执着肯定也是错误的。医学预测很少能仅基于DNA；环境也很重要。像智力这样复杂的事物可能受基因之外的许多因素影响。如果遗传论者想推进他们的主张，就需要更平衡的解释，而不仅仅是倡导行为。

Genetic selection is a way of exerting influence over others, "the ultimate collective control of human destinies," as writer H. G. Wells put it. Knowledge becomes power and power requires a sense of responsibility. In understanding cognitive ability, we must not elevate discrimination to a science; allowing people to climb the ladder of life only as far as their cells might suggest. This will need a more sceptical eye on the science. As technology progresses, we all have a duty to make sure that we shape a future that we would want to find ourselves in.

基因选择是一种对他人施加影响的方式，正如作家H. G. Wells所说，“是对人类命运的最终集体控制”。知识就是权力，而权力需要责任感。在理解认知能力时，我们不能将歧视提升为一门科学；让人只根据细胞可能暗示的程度来攀登生活的阶梯。这需要对科学持更怀疑的眼光。随着技术的进步，我们都有责任确保我们塑造一个我们愿意身处其中的未来。