Comprehension

Later, I realized that reviewing the history of nuclear physics served another purpose as well: It gave the lie to the naive belief that the physicists could have come together when nuclear fission was discovered (in Nazi Germany!) and agreed to keep the discovery a secret, thereby sparing humanity such a burden. No. Given the development of nuclear physics up to 1938, development that physicists throughout the world pursued in all innocence of any intention of finding the engine of a new weapon of mass destruction—only one of them, the remarkable Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard, took that possibility seriously—the discovery of nuclear fission was inevitable. To stop it, you would have had to stop physics. If German scientists hadn’t made the discovery when they did, French, American, Russian, Italian, or Danish scientists would have done so, almost certainly within days or weeks. They were all working at the same cutting edge, trying to understand the strange results of a simple experiment bombarding uranium with neutrons. Here was no Faustian bargain, as movie directors and other naifs still find it intellectually challenging to imagine. Here was no evil machinery that the noble scientists might hide from the problems and the generals. To the contrary, there was a high insight into how the world works, an energetic reaction, older than the earth, that science had finally devised the instruments and arrangements to coart forth. “Make it seem inevitable,” Louis Pasteur used to advise his students when they prepared to write up their discoveries. But it was. To wish that it might have been ignored or suppressed is barbarous. “Knowledge,” Niels Bohr once noted, “is itself the basis for civilization.” You cannot have the one without the other; the one depends upon the other. Nor can you have only benevolent knowledge; the scientific method doesn’t filter for benevolence. Knowledge has consequences, not always intended, not always comfortable, but always welcome. The earth revolves around the sun, not the sun around the earth. “It is a profound and necessary truth,” Robert Oppenheimer would say, “that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them.” 
...Bohr proposed once that the goal of science is not universal truth. Rather, he argued, the modest but relentless goal of science is “the gradual removal of prejudices.” The discovery that the earth revolves around the sun has gradually removed the prejudice that the earth is the center of the universe. The discovery of microbes is gradually removing the prejudice that disease is a punishment from God. The discovery of evolution is gradually removing the prejudice that Homo sapiens is a separate and special creation.

Question: 1

Based on the passage, which of the following would the author BEST agree with?

Show Hint

When evaluating passages about science and truth, focus on how the author views the relationship between scientific discoveries and human understanding. In this case, the author emphasizes science's role in uncovering the ultimate truths.
Updated On: Jan 7, 2026
  • Science is the ultimate truth.
  • Science is immoral.
  • Science is not benevolent.
  • Science is inconsiderate.
  • Science is amoral.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understanding the passage.
The passage emphasizes the importance of science in revealing profound truths about the world, such as the nature of the earth's movement, the discovery of microbes, and the theory of evolution. It explains that science leads to the removal of prejudices and helps us understand deeper truths, regardless of whether these truths are comfortable or not.
Step 2: Evaluating the options.
- (A) Science is the ultimate truth: This aligns with the passage’s message, which emphasizes that science uncovers deep, essential truths, even if they are uncomfortable.
- (B) Science is immoral: The passage does not support the idea that science is immoral. It highlights the importance of scientific discoveries, regardless of their consequences.
- (C) Science is not benevolent: While the passage mentions that science does not filter for benevolence, it does not argue that science is inherently malevolent or indifferent.
- (D) Science is inconsiderate: This is not aligned with the passage’s message. The passage stresses that science is valuable, even when its consequences are not always comfortable.
- (E) Science is amoral: The passage does not explicitly say that science is amoral. It focuses more on the way scientific discoveries shape our understanding of the world.
Step 3: Conclusion.
The correct answer is (A) because the passage stresses that science reveals profound truths, positioning it as the ultimate source of understanding.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2

Based on the passage, which of the following statements is DEFINITELY NOT true?

Show Hint

In reading comprehension, pay attention to the author's viewpoint on the topic. In this case, the passage stresses the role of scientific discoveries in seeking truth, not merely utility.
Updated On: Jan 7, 2026
  • For a civilization, knowledge creation is its core activity regardless of its nature.
  • The wheel of scientific progress cannot be stopped.
  • Science gradually removes false beliefs about the world.
  • Science does not promise only positive outcomes.
  • Scientific discoveries are driven by utility not by the pursuit of truth.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understanding the passage.
The passage emphasizes that scientific progress is a core activity for civilization and is driven by the search for truth, not by the pursuit of utility. The author suggests that discoveries are not simply about what is useful but also about what can be learned.
Step 2: Evaluating the options.
- (A) For a civilization, knowledge creation is its core activity regardless of its nature: This aligns with the passage, which highlights the importance of knowledge creation for civilization.
- (B) The wheel of scientific progress cannot be stopped: This is supported by the passage, where the author reflects on the inevitable nature of scientific progress.
- (C) Science gradually removes false beliefs about the world: This is in line with the passage, which describes how science challenges existing beliefs and removes prejudices.
- (D) Science does not promise only positive outcomes: This matches the passage’s message that science can have both beneficial and harmful consequences.
- (E) Scientific discoveries are driven by utility not by the pursuit of truth: This is incorrect. The passage emphasizes that discoveries are driven by the pursuit of truth, not solely by utility.
Step 3: Conclusion.
The correct answer is (E) because it contradicts the passage's emphasis on the pursuit of truth rather than utility in scientific discoveries.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3

Based on the passage, which of the following statements can be BEST concluded?

Show Hint

When analyzing passages, focus on the author’s implied messages about responsibility and outcomes. In this case, the passage suggests that the primary focus of scientists is on exploration, not always on the consequences of their work.
Updated On: Jan 7, 2026
  • Scientists are driven by the urge to explore, not by who the exploration affects.
  • Relying on science to answer moral questions is futile.
  • Scientists do not care about the consequences of scientific discoveries.
  • The future of mankind cannot be determined by scientific discoveries.
  • Scientists are not responsible for the impact of their scientific discoveries.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understanding the passage.
The passage discusses the role of scientific discoveries and their inevitable consequences, which scientists may not always anticipate. It highlights the drive for truth in scientific work, but also acknowledges the unpredictable impacts of discoveries.
Step 2: Evaluating the options.
- (A) Scientists are driven by the urge to explore, not by who the exploration affects: While exploration is a key motivator, the passage does not suggest that scientists are indifferent to the impact of their work.
- (B) Relying on science to answer moral questions is futile: The passage does not make this claim. It focuses on the importance of science but does not dismiss its role in moral questions.
- (C) Scientists do not care about the consequences of scientific discoveries: This is supported by the passage, which implies that while scientists may not always be aware of or responsible for the consequences, the focus is on the pursuit of truth.
- (D) The future of mankind cannot be determined by scientific discoveries: This is not clearly addressed in the passage. The author focuses more on the inevitability and consequences of discoveries rather than their influence on the future of mankind.
- (E) Scientists are not responsible for the impact of their scientific discoveries: The passage does not explicitly state that scientists are not responsible for their discoveries. It reflects more on the unforeseen consequences of their work.
Step 3: Conclusion.
The correct answer is (C) because it reflects the passage's message that scientists may not always be aware of or responsible for the consequences of their discoveries.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Reading Comprehension

View More Questions

Questions Asked in XAT exam

View More Questions