#14 - Roger Bacon, the thirteenth-century scientist, is said

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Flaw. The correct answer choice is (E)

In this stimulus, the author attempts to discredit all of Francis Bacon's work based on one inconsistency:

• Premise: Bacon warned against relying uncritically on opinions of others.
  
  Premise: Bacon is guilty of such reliance himself.
  
  Conclusion: Bacon's important optics discoveries should be disregarded.

This argument is clearly flawed. Bacon may have acted somewhat hypocritically in one regard, but this obviously does not invalidate Bacon's every assertion.

Answer choice (A): There is no such presumption; the reason that authority opinion is referenced is that Bacon advised against accepting such opinions uncritically, yet did so himself.

Answer choice (B): While the author does do this, this is not the flaw in the reasoning. The flaw is that this is used to show Bacon to be hypocritical and thereby conclude that his findings should be disregarded.

Answer choice (C): The author does reference Bacon's statements, but does not assert that they are evidence of Bacon's opinions. Even if this had been done, this would not be a flaw in this context, so this answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (D): The author does not ignore this fact—the argument does not require its reference. The flaw is that Bacon's scientific findings are questioned not based on their antiquity, but on the fact that Bacon sometimes acted in ways contrary to what he advised.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. Based on Bacon's hypocrisy (a critique of his character), the author of the stimulus concludes that Bacon's scientific findings are questionable.

[jared.xu]

I would like to know why the answer is not A. We are told that Bacon "warned his students against relying uncritically on the opinions of authorities." And then we are told, "this did not stop Bacon himself from appealing to authority." The most obvious flaw to me is that nowhere are we told that he appeals to authority "uncritically." Anybody in a science or any other academic field would do well to cite an authority when they make their argumentation. And so my prephrase is: since we are not told Bacon does so "uncritically," the flaw must be the unwarranted equating of appealing to any authority opinion to being uncritical. I chose A because it states, "presumes, without providing justification, that authority opinion is often incorrect."

The conclusion sentence does state a contradiction "between his statements and his own behavior," but the flaw of the argument does not originate in this ad hominem attack, but with rather with the unwarranted equating of appealing to authority with being uncritical. Please tell me where I erred, and how I could prevent this mistake in the future. Thank you in advance for replying.

[Steve Stein]

As you correctly pointed out, the author concludes that we should ignore Bacon in view of the contradiction between his statements and his own behavior. The author doesn't say that we should ignore Bacon because of his appeal to authority--rather, the author's flawed argument is that we should ignore Bacon because he is a hypocrite, which is an attack on Bacon's character, as provided in correct answer choice E.