#12 - Specific Reference , Must Be True

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

The correct answer choice is (C).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[Claire.L]

Hello!

Why C is correct not B? Which sentence can tell us? Thank you!!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi Claire.L!

This question stems asks us how passage B relates to "the assertion in passage A that 'skeptics of paranormal phenomena are generally near the reductionist extreme.'"

For support for answer choice (C) over (B), one good place to start is the definitions given in the first paragraph of passage A. In particular, "The reductionist view holds that all kinds of knowledge, from physics to ethics, can be reduced to science. The traditional view holds that science is one of many independent sources of knowledge." In passage A, Dyson identifies himself as holding the traditional view, and the passage suggests that this impacts his views on psychic and other paranormal research. For Dyson, paranormal phenomena might still be possible even if scientific methods cannot confirm them to be true, that is, even if we cannot have scientific knowledge about them.

In contrast, passage B reflects what passage A identifies as the reductionist view. For example, the author holds that "[t]he only way to find out if anecdotes represent real phenomena is controlled experimental tests." This language suggests that the author of passage B thinks only scientific knowledge counts. Since psychic and other paranormal research relies on anecdotes and can't be confirmed in scientific studies, the author of passage B differs from Dyson and concludes that such paranormal phenomena are bogus if science cannot confirm them to be true.

So passage B instantiates a view that is skeptical of paranormal phenomena and is near the reductionist extreme. This is why (C) is correct: "Passage B serves as an example of that assertion." We'd need something explicit in passage that is dismissive of the mentioned assertion for (B) to be a contender. It seems like we don't know what the author of passage B's views would be with respect to that assertion.

[Claire.L]

Hi Luke,

Thank you for your explanation! I got it.

Hi Claire.L!

This question stems asks us how passage B relates to "the assertion in passage A that 'skeptics of paranormal phenomena are generally near the reductionist extreme.'"

For support for answer choice (C) over (B), one good place to start is the definitions given in the first paragraph of passage A. In particular, "The reductionist view holds that all kinds of knowledge, from physics to ethics, can be reduced to science. The traditional view holds that science is one of many independent sources of knowledge." In passage A, Dyson identifies himself as holding the traditional view, and the passage suggests that this impacts his views on psychic and other paranormal research. For Dyson, paranormal phenomena might still be possible even if scientific methods cannot confirm them to be true, that is, even if we cannot have scientific knowledge about them.

In contrast, passage B reflects what passage A identifies as the reductionist view. For example, the author holds that "[t]he only way to find out if anecdotes represent real phenomena is controlled experimental tests." This language suggests that the author of passage B thinks only scientific knowledge counts. Since psychic and other paranormal research relies on anecdotes and can't be confirmed in scientific studies, the author of passage B differs from Dyson and concludes that such paranormal phenomena are bogus if science cannot confirm them to be true.

So passage B instantiates a view that is skeptical of paranormal phenomena and is near the reductionist extreme. This is why (C) is correct: "Passage B serves as an example of that assertion." We'd need something explicit in passage that is dismissive of the mentioned assertion for (B) to be a contender. It seems like we don't know what the author of passage B's views would be with respect to that assertion.

[lounalola]

I understand why C is correct, however I am finding it difficult to completely rule out B because of the language used in the last sentence of the passage, he seems to dismiss the discussion of reductionist scientists.

[Amber Thomas]

Hi Lounalola!

Let's break down our two passages:

Passage A: The reductionist view of science in human understanding states that all kinds of knowledge can be reduced to science. The question of the limits of science are tied closely to paranormal phenomena, which do not lend themselves to scientific study or interpretation. Based on a wide variety of evidence indicating the truth of paranormal phenomena, the author does no accept the conclusion that paranormal phenomena do not exist simply because they cannot be accessed by scientific investigation. Science and the existence of paranormal phenomena can coexist.

Passage B: The author of Passage A's claim is ridiculous. Scientists should know that the only way to find out if anecdotal evidence is accurate is through controlled, experimental testing. Since paranormal phenomena have been repeatedly subject to rigorous scientific testing, and nothing has ever been proven, paranormal phenomena do not exist.

What we can see here is that the author of Passage B takes what the author of Passage A describes as a reductionist view (i.e. paranormal phenomena do not exist because they cannot be proven by science).

Our question stem asks us to describe the relationship between the claim that "skeptics of paranormal phenomena are generally near the reductionist extreme," and Passage B.

Answer Choice B states that: "Passage B dismisses that assertion as not worthy of a response."

This one is tricky, because the tone of Passage B is very dismissive-- however, it is not dismissive towards this claim specifically. The author of Passage B does not make any claims about whether or not it is reductionist to be skeptical of paranormal phenomena. They may very well even agree that they are a reductionist, and are indeed skeptical paranormal phenomena. The author of Passage B is instead dismissive of the claim that there is another, potentially valid view of science that would allow paranormal phenomena to coexist with scientific inquiry, not the assertion that paranormal skeptics are reductionist in nature.

I hope this helps!