- Wed Apr 13, 2016 5:18 pm
#23003
Complete Question Explanation
Assumption. The correct answer choice is (C)
The stimulus concludes that, alongside benefits, science has taken away much that is greatly valued. The premises involve the idea that evolution challenges divine creation, which takes away our sense of assured importance.
The argument is weak, because each logical step involves a leap, an unwarranted assumption. A map of the linking assumptions follows:
Answer choice (A): The argument does not need to assume that science and technology are of less value than religion. First, the stimulus never specifically mentioned religion. Second, the stimulus acknowledges several times that science creates benefits, and never argues that there is an overall loss. This choice is wrong.
Answer choice (B): The argument concerns whether a loss has occurred, not whether people have resisted change. Furthermore, the fact that people resist change is not good support for the idea that change involves loss, so this response does not even much support the argument. This choice is largely irrelevant and is incorrect.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. The argument makes two linking assumptions, one of which is the idea that the assurance of importance is highly valued.
Answer choice (D): The stimulus concerns whether people loose something valuable as a result of science, not whether the world was a better place before science-- according to the stimulus, science has benefits as well as drawbacks. Furthermore, even if science does not make the world worse, it can cause loss in some area, so it is not necessary for the stimulus to assume that science makes the world worse.
Answer choice (E): Since the stimulus argues that science has removed an assurance of importance, it could be somewhat inconsistent with the passage to assume that science and technology now promote a sense of importance. In any case, that assumption would do more to cause doubt than to support the stimulus, so this choice is wrong.
Assumption. The correct answer choice is (C)
The stimulus concludes that, alongside benefits, science has taken away much that is greatly valued. The premises involve the idea that evolution challenges divine creation, which takes away our sense of assured importance.
The argument is weak, because each logical step involves a leap, an unwarranted assumption. A map of the linking assumptions follows:
- Challenge divine creation→No assurance of importance→Great Loss.
Answer choice (A): The argument does not need to assume that science and technology are of less value than religion. First, the stimulus never specifically mentioned religion. Second, the stimulus acknowledges several times that science creates benefits, and never argues that there is an overall loss. This choice is wrong.
Answer choice (B): The argument concerns whether a loss has occurred, not whether people have resisted change. Furthermore, the fact that people resist change is not good support for the idea that change involves loss, so this response does not even much support the argument. This choice is largely irrelevant and is incorrect.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. The argument makes two linking assumptions, one of which is the idea that the assurance of importance is highly valued.
Answer choice (D): The stimulus concerns whether people loose something valuable as a result of science, not whether the world was a better place before science-- according to the stimulus, science has benefits as well as drawbacks. Furthermore, even if science does not make the world worse, it can cause loss in some area, so it is not necessary for the stimulus to assume that science makes the world worse.
Answer choice (E): Since the stimulus argues that science has removed an assurance of importance, it could be somewhat inconsistent with the passage to assume that science and technology now promote a sense of importance. In any case, that assumption would do more to cause doubt than to support the stimulus, so this choice is wrong.