Question

The duty of science, according to the author, is :-

Answer 1

The passage emphasizes that science, while historically aligned with war and destruction, now has a new and urgent responsibility: to help humanity adapt to the drastically changed physical and social environment created by scientific advancement.
A key sentence from the passage:
"I think it is the duty of science - I do not say of every individual man of science - to study the means by which we can adapt ourselves to the new world."
This sentence directly supports Option 4.
Let us analyze the other options:
- Option 1 suggests realizing a happy new world — this is the ultimate goal, but not the defined duty of science. The duty is to study the means, not to guarantee the result.
- Option 2 refers to pursuing knowledge for its own sake — the author acknowledges this is part of the scientist’s mindset, but not the duty he argues for in the current context.
- Option 3 suggests only useful discoveries should be made — the author explicitly refutes this by stating scientists cannot predict outcomes and should not limit discoveries.
Therefore, Option 4 accurately reflects the author’s main argument.

Answer 2

The passage details how Archimedes, Leonardo da Vinci, and Galileo contributed to military efforts through their scientific knowledge.
Examples from the passage:
"Archimedes was respected for his scientific defense of Syracuse... Leonardo obtained employment... because of his skill in fortification... Galileo... for calculating the trajectories of projectiles."
These examples show that science has historically been used in warfare, which substantiates Option 1.
Evaluating options:
- Option 1 is directly supported — science and war have been closely linked.
- Option 2 is too general — the passage focuses on war, not general leadership.
- Option 3 — patronage is not the main focus of this section.
- Option 4 — pursuit for knowledge's sake is discussed later, not in this context.
Therefore, Option 1 is correct.

Answer 3

The author argues that scientists have created the danger of a great war through their development of destructive technologies like H-bombs. Therefore, they have a special responsibility to educate and help prevent such a war.
Key line:
"It is the labours of scientists which have caused the danger... scientists must do everything in their power to save mankind."
Analyzing the options:
- Option 1 is partially true, but not the main ground — it focuses on their knowledge, not their responsibility.
- Option 2 is correct — the author stresses the duty arises from their role in causing the threat.
- Option 3 — historical association is mentioned, but not the primary reason given for duty.
- Option 4 — the author does not blame politicians entirely; focus is on scientists’ responsibility.
Hence, Option 2 is correct.

Answer 4

The author begins the passage with:
"A difficult readjustment in the scientist’s conception of duty is imperatively necessary."
This sentence sets the theme — scientists must move from loyalty to their state to loyalty to the human race. This realignment of duty is critical in modern times.
Analyzing the options:
- Option 1 — loyalty to the state is criticized, not supported.
- Option 2 — directly reflects the author’s main argument.
- Option 3 — control by the state is not advocated.
- Option 4 — independence is not the focus; responsibility to humanity is.
Thus, Option 2 is correct.

Answer 5

The author introduces the case of Soviet scientist Kapitza to highlight a universal trend observed among scientists globally — namely, their loyalty to their respective nation-states.
The passage narrates how Kapitza, despite being educated in the West and trained by the prominent scientist Rutherford, ultimately chose to serve the Soviet Union when he was denied permission to return to Cambridge.
This situation is used to emphasize the point that scientists, regardless of geography (whether East or West), have historically felt that their first duty lies with their own country rather than with humanity at large.
Option 1 — “every scientist has his price” — is incorrect because the author is not implying that Kapitza was bought or corrupt; the argument is not about bribery or personal gain, but about national loyalty.
Option 2 — While there may be truth to the fact that communists in the USSR limited independent thought, the author’s primary focus is not on Soviet repression but on Kapitza’s loyalty to his nation.
Option 4 — The author never claims that scientists in the West are more responsible. In fact, he argues that both Eastern and Western scientists have shown the same pattern of loyalty to their respective states.
Therefore, Option 3 is correct because it directly reflects the author's main argument: that scientists globally have placed loyalty to their own state above a broader duty to humanity.

Answer 6

This is a “NOT true” question, so we must find the one option that contradicts the author’s statements. Let us evaluate each option in detail:
Option 1 — This is true. The author warns that unless scientists rethink their duty, war could cause human extinction. He quotes Lord Adrian and emphasizes the risk posed by scientific developments if misused.
Option 2 — This is also true. The author clearly mentions that scientists, whether from East or West, have always prioritized national loyalty above global responsibility.
Option 3 — This is true. The author notes that the danger to humanity originates from the work of scientists, particularly through weapons like the A-bomb and H-bomb. Thus, their labor has led to the potential for annihilation.
Option 4 — This is NOT true. The author provides historical examples showing scientists were respected not only for knowledge but also for military applications — Archimedes’ defense of Syracuse, Leonardo’s fortifications, Galileo’s projectile calculations, and scientists during the French Revolution working on explosives.
Therefore, traditionally, scientists have often been respected for their role in weapon-making, contradicting the claim made in Option 4.
Hence, Option 4 is incorrect according to the passage and is the correct answer to this “not true” question.

Answer 7

The author provides a nuanced view of the responsibilities of scientists in the modern age. While acknowledging that scientific discovery has always been associated with national interest and war, he urges a shift in focus.
The passage explicitly states that while pursuing knowledge is important, scientists must now ensure that this knowledge is shared openly and not manipulated by governments or organizations to serve narrow interests or propaganda.
This is because the consequences of scientific work today — including nuclear weapons — are too grave to allow secrecy or distortion.
Option 1 — This is incorrect. The author opposes the idea of scientists working merely for state interests. He calls for loyalty to the human race, not to a particular nation.
Option 2 — This is partly correct but not complete. The author states that effects of new knowledge are hard to predict, but scientists cannot ignore consequences entirely. He stresses their role in educating humanity about the dangers.
Option 3 — This is exactly what the author says: scientists must ensure that knowledge is widely disseminated and not distorted for propaganda. This reflects the author’s emphasis on scientific duty to truth and humanity.
Option 4 — This is too extreme. The author does not suggest refusal to serve national interest altogether, but calls for a higher loyalty to humankind.
Hence, Option 3 is the most accurate representation of the author’s view of a scientist’s duty.

Answer 8

The author addresses the dangers that have arisen from rapid scientific advancements, especially those related to the physical world such as the development of destructive weapons.
While acknowledging the immense power and potential of physical sciences, the author asserts that these powers have often been acquired hastily, without a corresponding evolution in human behavior, ethics, or social structures.
He explains that while science has improved our ability to control nature, it has not yet mastered or improved the inner nature of man — his psychology, emotions, or social behavior.
This gap has led to the misuse of scientific discoveries and poses serious threats to humanity.
To address these dangers, the author proposes that we must focus on progress in the human sciences, such as psychology, anthropology, and sociology.
He emphasizes that unless we adapt our beliefs, habits, and behaviors to the new world created by scientific advancements, we will face extinction, just like the dinosaurs who failed to adapt.
Therefore, Option 1 is incorrect because pursuing more physical science without adapting human behavior could worsen the problem.
Option 2 is partially true but not the central solution; scientists’ responsibility alone is insufficient without societal adaptation.
Option 4 — enlightening the public — is helpful, but again, it is not the comprehensive solution the author proposes.
Option 3 is correct, as the author explicitly states that the evils caused by the misuse of physical science can be mitigated only by adequate progress in human sciences that help reshape human character and social relations.

Answer 9

In the final part of the passage, the author speaks of science as a liberator, not only from the physical limitations imposed by nature but also from the internal destructive forces within human beings.
He explains that science can enable a world without poverty, war, or widespread illness — which are forms of bondage to physical nature.
Moreover, when science progresses further, especially in the human sciences, it will allow us to manage and reduce our destructive passions, such as fear, hatred, and envy.
This double liberation — from external (nature) and internal (passions) forces — is central to the author's concept of science as a true liberator.
Option 1 — While desirable, the author does not state that unification of nations is the primary way science liberates humanity.
Option 2 — The possibility of a happier life is mentioned, but happiness is a result, not the mechanism of liberation.
Option 4 — The author does not focus on ending superstitions, though science does challenge old beliefs.
Option 3 is correct because it encompasses both key ideas of the author: freedom from nature’s control and from emotional destructiveness.
This aligns perfectly with the author's vision of science liberating man from both physical and psychological burdens.