Scientists who believe cell phones are dangerous have been throwing out hypotheses to explain away the negative results. Maybe something about the【1】animals raised their rates of cancer or sperm problems, so【2】the exposed animals didn't seem to be harmed. Maybe the studies should have used pulsed,【3】radiation rather than a continuous beam, the better to【4】the way we actually use mobile phones. Maybe it matters【5】the lab animals are zapped【6】in a device like a Ferris wheel or while【7】around in cages. On the other hand, if these details do【8】, maybe that in itself is significant.
Scientists who【9】claims that cell-phone radiation is causing an epidemic of brain cancer【10】that there isn't any mechanism.【11】textbook biophysics, only radiation that has enough energy to ionize molecules—that is, knock off electrons—can【12】cancer. Cell phones don't【13】energy great enough to ionize molecules in living cells. Their【14】is "far below the cancer energy threshold,"【15】physicist Robert Park of the University of Maryland, who often【16】junk science. But whenever he makes that【17】in his What's New e-newsletter, he gets【18】with angry responses insisting there are other ways low-energy radiation can【19】"I don't like cell phones and I don't like writing about cell phones," says Park,【20】the damned issue just won't go away. "
(1)
A. amphibious
B. cool-blooded
C. exposed
D. mysterious
In this sense it is true that it is the duty of society to create conditions in which such men can live. For whatever the value of any individual contribution, the general body of work is of immense value to everyone. But of course things are not so formal, in reality. There is not society on the one hand and these individuals on the other. In ordinary living, and in his work, the contributor shares in the life of his society, which often affects him both in minor ways and in ways sometimes so deep that he is not even aware of them. His ability to make his work public depends on the actual communication system: the language itself, or certain visual or musical or scientific conventions, and the institutions through which the communication will be passed. The effect of these on his actual work can be almost infinitely variable. For it is not only a communication system outside him; it is also, however original he may be, a communication system which is in fact part of himself. Many contributors make active use of this kind of internal communication system. It is to themselves, in a way, that they first show their conceptions, play their music and present their arguments. Not only as a way of getting these clear, in the process of almost endless testing that active composition involves. But also, whether consciously or not, as a way of putting the experience info a communicable form. If one mind has grasped it, then it may be open to other minds.
In this deep sense, the society is in some ways already present in the act of composition. This is always very difficult to understand, but often, when we have the advantage of looking back at a period, we can see, even if we cannot explain, bow this was so. We can see how much even highly original individuals had in common, in their actual work, and in what is called their "structure of feeling", with other individual workers of the time, and with the society of that time to which they belonged. The historian is also continually struck by the fact that men of this kind felt isolated at the very time when in reality they were beginning to get through. This can also be noticed in our own time, when some of the most deeply influential men feel isolated and even rejected. The society and the communication are there, but it is difficult to recognize them, difficult to be sure. (670)
Creative artists and thinkers achieve communication by ______.
A. depending on shared conventions
B. fashioning their own conventions
C. adjusting their personal feelings
D. elaborating a common language