- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Wed Apr 27, 2016 11:45 am
#23488
Complete Question Explanation
Flaw in the Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)
This stimulus begins with the point that most modern Westerners would consider astrology for the unscientific. The author defends such beliefs with the fact that brilliant people from the past accepted astrology. Based on this premise, the author concludes that there is no scientific basis for rejecting astrology.
This is a fairly weak argument. Since science builds on the foundations created in the past, many of the greatest past scientists would likely have had beliefs that had yet to be discredited. As we are asked about the criticism to which the argument is most vulnerable, we should look for an answer that accurately describes this vulnerability.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice, as it perfectly reflects the vulnerability prephrased above. Past scientists could easily have had beliefs that conflict with later theories.
Answer choice (B): This assertion is logically flawed, and incorrect. There will always be arguments on both sides of any controversy by definition.
Answer choice (C): This answer choice does not represent a flaw in the argument; the evidence is not limited to cultures influenced by Western science. It is the Western Scientists whose views on astrology are being challenged by the author.
Answer choice (D): This is not a flaw in the argument, as there is no such assumption implied. In fact, the author believes that most Western science types don't believe that Astrology has scientific legitimacy.
Answer choice (E): While this might be the case, it is not a flaw in the argument set forth in the stimulus, because the author is focused on the question of whether there is a legitimate scientific basis for rejecting astrology.
Flaw in the Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)
This stimulus begins with the point that most modern Westerners would consider astrology for the unscientific. The author defends such beliefs with the fact that brilliant people from the past accepted astrology. Based on this premise, the author concludes that there is no scientific basis for rejecting astrology.
This is a fairly weak argument. Since science builds on the foundations created in the past, many of the greatest past scientists would likely have had beliefs that had yet to be discredited. As we are asked about the criticism to which the argument is most vulnerable, we should look for an answer that accurately describes this vulnerability.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice, as it perfectly reflects the vulnerability prephrased above. Past scientists could easily have had beliefs that conflict with later theories.
Answer choice (B): This assertion is logically flawed, and incorrect. There will always be arguments on both sides of any controversy by definition.
Answer choice (C): This answer choice does not represent a flaw in the argument; the evidence is not limited to cultures influenced by Western science. It is the Western Scientists whose views on astrology are being challenged by the author.
Answer choice (D): This is not a flaw in the argument, as there is no such assumption implied. In fact, the author believes that most Western science types don't believe that Astrology has scientific legitimacy.
Answer choice (E): While this might be the case, it is not a flaw in the argument set forth in the stimulus, because the author is focused on the question of whether there is a legitimate scientific basis for rejecting astrology.