The history of science is the real history of mankind. In this striking epigram, a nineteenth-century writer links science with its background. Like most epigrams, its power lies in emphasizing by contrast an aspect of truth which may be easily overlooked. In this case, it is easy to overlook the relations between science and mankind, and to treat the former as some abstract third party, which can sometimes be praised for its beneficial influences, but frequently and conveniently blamed for the horrors of war. Science and mankind cannot be divorced from time to time at men’s convenience. Yet we have seen that, in spite of countless opportunities of improvement, the opening years of the present period of civilization have been dominated by international conflict. Is this the inevitable result of the progress of science or does the fault lie elsewhere?
Which of the following is/are emphatically conveyed by the author of the passage?
Select the correct answer using the code given below.
The passage strongly conveys the intricate and inseparable relationship between science and mankind, asserting that they "cannot be divorced from time to time at men’s convenience." However, it does not emphatically state that mankind's continued existence is solely dependent on science (Statement 1). Similarly, the author questions whether international conflict is an "inevitable result of the progress of science or does the fault lie elsewhere," rather than definitively claiming that science will "ultimately determine the destiny of mankind" (Statement 2). The passage emphasizes the connection and the responsibility associated with scientific progress, but avoids making absolute claims about survival or ultimate destiny. Therefore, neither statement 1 nor statement 2 is emphatically conveyed.