当算法助推伪科学：我们需要怎样的“真相过滤器”？

Artificial intelligence and social media are accelerating the spread of misinformation dressed as science. Lies that once travelled slowly, and stayed relatively local, now surge across the globe. When people share mistruths – for example, about vaccines, paracetamol or clean energy – the consequences are real and sometimes tragic. Preventable diseases such as measles are now returning to Australian communities because of unfounded fears about vaccines.

1. ________
Misinformation is false or misleading information. Sometimes it’s spread by people who deliberately lie about the facts; this is referred to as disinformation. And sometimes it’s spread by those who just don’t know better. Either way, it is becoming more prevalent and more corrosive at all levels, affecting both personal and social dimensions. At a personal level, bad information can damage your health, lead to poor financial decisions, and undermine your ability to make informed choices. At a social level, it erodes trust in institutions, poisons public debate, and pushes people to extremes. Ultimately, misinformation makes it harder to agree on facts, harder to work together to solve shared problems, and undermines the social solidarity and democratic resilience.
2. ________
When faced with large volumes of information, we often rely on mental shortcuts. While they help us process the information quickly, they can backfire – especially when the information is emotional, threatening or comes from like-minded people. We’re more likely to believe it if it aligns with our existing views or comes from someone we trust.
3. ________
In light of our brain’s wiring, when confronted with new information we need to pause and ask: is this the best information I can get? Would it stand up to scientific scrutiny? Did it come from someone using the scientific method – a way of rigorously testing ideas through observation, hypothesis and experiment – or just from someone I follow online? To help answer these questions, you don’t need to be a scientist to spot good science. If in doubt, look for scientific consensus – the collective agreement of experts that is based on accumulated evidence. It is built through repeated testing, peer review and open debate. Peer review – where scientists scrutinise each other’s work – helps detect and correct errors. It’s not perfect, but it’s robust. For example, early in the Covid pandemic, scientists initially underestimated the impact of airborne transmission. But peer-reviewed studies quickly corrected that understanding, leading to updated health advice. That is science working as it should.
4. ________
Trusting science isn’t about having blind faith in scientists. It’s trust in the scientific method: predict, test, observe, refine. Science questions everything, and while it doesn’t claim perfection, it offers the best knowledge we have at any given time. It’s not the only source of truth, but it’s a damn good one. Almost every element of modern life – including the device you’re reading this on – is built on knowledge gained through the scientific method.
5. ________

Misinformation is harder to detect and dangerous, so we must be extremely alert because the stakes are extremely high. Our collective wellbeing depends on our capacity to distinguish credible science from persuasive fiction. It depends on our willingness to think critically, seek reliable proof from credible sources, and keep our nonsense detectors switched on.

Directions:
Read the text and answer the questions by choosing the most suitable subheading from the list A-G for each numbered paragraph (1-5). There are two extra subheadings which you do not need to use. 


[A] A Call for Vigilance and Critical Thinking 

[B] The Perfection of Science

[C] The Foundation of Scientific Trust 

[D] Cognitive Shortcuts and Belief 

[E] The Accelerated Spread of Falsehoods

[F] Defining Misinformation and Its Impacts

[G] Tools for Identifying Reliable Science 

                         原创编写 版权所有 侵权必究！ 每日更新 个性化阅读 英语飙升！

1.1.

A

B

C

D

解析：选F。1. F该段落的核心任务是为下文讨论奠定基础。它开篇明义，给出了“错误信息”和“伪信息”的准确定义。随后，通过“At a personal level...”和“At a social level...”等标志性语句，系统性地阐述了错误信息在个人层面（损害健康、导致糟糕财务决策）和社会层面（侵蚀制度信任、毒化公共辩论、破坏社会团结）的广泛影响。因此，小标题F完美地概括了本段“下定义”和“析影响”的两个核心内容。

2.2.

A

B

C

D

解析：选D。2. D 该段落深入探讨了人们容易相信和传播错误信息的心理根源。它指出，面对海量信息，我们依赖“mental shortcuts”（心理捷径），而这些捷径在面对情绪化信息或来自志同道合者的信息时会“backfire”（产生反效果）。段落的最后一句话明确指出，我们更可能相信与我们现有观点一致或来自信任之人的信息。这整个段落都是在描述一种认知和心理过程，因此小标题D准确地抓住了本段的主题。

3.3.

A

B

C

D

解析：选G。3. G 该段落从上一段的“问题”（心理捷径）转向了“解决方案”。它提供了一系列具体的、可操作的工具和方法，来帮助人们辨别信息的真伪。这些方法包括：暂停并提问、思考信息是否能经受“scientific scrutiny”（科学审查）、寻找“scientific consensus”（科学共识），并解释了“peer review”（同行评审）这一核心机制如何工作（通过新冠的例子具体说明）。整个段落都在教导读者“如何做”，因此小标题G“识别可靠科学的工具”是最贴切的概括。

4.4.

A

B

C

D

解析：选C。4. C 该段落超越了具体的辨别工具，深入探讨了我们可以信任科学的内在原因和哲学基础。它明确区分了“对科学家的盲目信仰”和“对科学方法的信任”，并精辟地将科学方法概括为“predict, test, observe, refine”（预测、检验、观察、修正）。它承认科学不完美，但强调其提供的已是当前最佳知识，并以现代科技的成功作为佐证。因此，本段的核心是在阐述信任科学的根基何在，小标题C准确地体现了这一深层含义。

5.5.

A

B

C

D

解析：选A。5. A 作为全文的结论段，该段落不再提出新的事实或方法，而是发出了强有力的行动号召和总结性呼吁。它强调了形势的严峻性（“the stakes are extremely high”），并明确指出我们的集体福祉依赖于“distinguish credible science from persuasive fiction”（区分可信科学与诱人虚构）的能力和“think critically”（进行批判性思考）的意愿。这种带有呼吁和总结性质的结尾，与小标题A完全吻合。