Correct Option (C)
The passage states that science, despite its inherent dangers, uniquely "opens up as nothing else can, the vision of a possible happy world; a world without poverty, without war, with little illness." This emphasizes science's indispensable role in conceptualizing and potentially achieving such a world. The author further describes science as "in its very nature a liberator," reinforcing its fundamental capacity to overcome challenges and enable a better future. Therefore, the implication is that a happy world, as envisioned by the author, is not attainable without the contributions of science.
Incorrect Options:
-
Option (A): A happy world is a dream of science. This option is inaccurate. The passage goes beyond merely presenting a happy world as a dream; it positions science as the unique means to provide a concrete "vision of a possible happy world," suggesting a pathway to its realization rather than just an aspiration.
-
Option (B): Science only can build a happy world, but it is also the only major threat. This option contains two overstatements. While the passage indicates science uniquely enables the vision of a happy world ("as nothing else can"), it does not explicitly state science is the only factor in building it. Furthermore, while acknowledging that science "has its dangers" and "threatens the present," the passage does not assert that science is the only major threat to humanity.
-
Option (D): A happy world is not at all possible with or without science. This option directly contradicts the optimistic stance conveyed in the passage. The author explicitly states that science "opens up... the vision of a possible happy world" and is "in its very nature a liberator," indicating a belief in science's capacity to facilitate a better world, not that such a world is impossible.