#9 - A scientific theory is a good theory if it satisfies

[mankariousc]

So sorry about the late reply, but this was extremely helpful! Thank you so much!

[ltowns1]

Hi, so I'm drilling questions and I came across this one. I incorrectly chose (D)after narrowing it down to (B) and (D). Going off the previous conversation, had the condition said "several elements", would that have made a difference in the viability of (D)? I always assumed that both could be defined as more than one. Furthermore, I realize this question is from PT4, have there been any other questions that use this specific difference between "few" and "many" which seems very subtle to me. Thank you.

[Adam Tyson]

I'm not sure if you mean the rule in the stimulus being changed from few to several, or the language of answer D being changed from many to several, ltowns1, but in either case I think that would change the scenario enough to make D an answer that no longer had to be true! "Several" could still be few, depending on what those words mean in a given context, and it could also mean many, again depending on context. Of course, answer B would also still be something not required by the stimulus, so we would have to eliminate or alter it before D could be the only contender. As Jonathan showed a little earlier in this thread, though, "few" and "many" are incompatible.

Beware, though - "few" doesn't automatically mean more than 1! It could mean just 1, as in "few of the teams in the NFL are named the Panthers". This would be odd, like saying "many" when all is true, but still technically correct. But "a few" definitely implies more than one, as in "a few of the teams in the are named after large wild cats". We would not say "a few of the teams are named the Panthers".

Phew!

[ltowns1]

I'm not sure if you mean the rule in the stimulus being changed from few to several, or the language of answer D being changed from many to several, ltowns1, but in either case I think that would change the scenario enough to make D an answer that no longer had to be true! "Several" could still be few, depending on what those words mean in a given context, and it could also mean many, again depending on context. Of course, answer B would also still be something not required by the stimulus, so we would have to eliminate or alter it before D could be the only contender. As Jonathan showed a little earlier in this thread, though, "few" and "many" are incompatible.

Beware, though - "few" doesn't automatically mean more than 1! It could mean just 1, as in "few of the teams in the NFL are named the Panthers". This would be odd, like saying "many" when all is true, but still technically correct. But "a few" definitely implies more than one, as in "a few of the teams in the are named after large wild cats". We would not say "a few of the teams are named the Panthers".

Phew!

Gotcha, thanks so much. Weird that you would use that example, I'm actually from North Carolina, and I love the Panthers! so that was a great example lol ha ha.

[Adam Tyson]

Go Cats! I lived in NC for about 20 years, attended NC Central School of Law, and practiced law in Matthews for a while. I'm a Tarheel and Panthers fan all the way! Got my Luke jersey ready to go for the new season. Can't wait!

Keep pounding!

[ltowns1]

Go Cats! I lived in NC for about 20 years, attended NC Central School of Law, and practiced law in Matthews for a while. I'm a Tarheel and Panthers fan all the way! Got my Luke jersey ready to go for the new season. Can't wait!

Keep pounding!

WHAT!!! Lol I went to NCCU for undergrad, graduated in 2014! That’s awesome! Keep Pounding!

[whardy21]

I was between B and C and chose C. From your diagram it appears mine is wrong I had the following:

Large class of observations scientific theory is good

and


definite predictions

I considered C a loser because I thought C was one requirement that needed to be satisfied to be a good theory. Thats how I read C. I thought C needed to add the part about definite predictions. So when answer C says the basis of the scientific model is enough to meet the good theory, I inferred they are saying thats enough to satisfy the requirement to be a good theory. That is why I categorized answer C as a loser. Please Help.

[George George]

@whardy21

I see how you read it, however, in context, the "four elements" should be taken to refer to the Aristotelian elements of "earth, air, fire, and water." So, what (C) is really saying is that those four elements could be enough to satisfy the simplicity requirement - one of the two things you need to establish in order to be a "good theory." It's not saying that satisfying one prong of this two-part test is itself sufficient to be a good theory. (That would be a misreading.)

Good Q!

[Pjmartin15]

Hi,

Could you go into further detail as to why answer choice (C) is incorrect?

Thanks,
Pamela

[Paul Marsh]

Hi Pjmartin, sure thing! The stimulus sets up a conditional:

Simple (Contains Only a Few Elements) + Definite Predictions Good Theory

So according to our stimulus, a Good Theory requires two conditions: Simplicity and Predictivity. The stimulus then goes on to say that Aristotle's theory meets the first condition (Simplicity) but not the second one (Predictivity). Answer Choice (C) says that four elements can be enough to meet the Simplicity prong. Since the stimulus tells us that Aristotle's theory uses four elements, and it also tells us that it meets the first condition of Simplicity, then we know that four elements can be enough to meet the Simplicity Prong. Therefore (C) must be true, and so it is an incorrect answer. Hope that helps!