#18 - Specific Reference, Must Be True, Purpose/Function

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

The correct answer choice is (B).

Answer choice (A):

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

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

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

[T.B.Justin]

What would be an explanation of the latter half of answer choice (A): "It presents a view opposed to a theory and points out an internal contradiction"

lines 32-35, point out that proponents of abiogenic theory have experimental evidence suggesting higher pressures within the mantle have the tendency to offset the higher temperatures, allowing hydrocarbons to exist in the mantle, thus I think nullifies the opponents charge of abiogenic theory that hydrocarbon could not exist in the mantle because of high temperatures that would destroy or break them down.

I assume internal contradiction is not what I am describing, so what would an internal contradiction look like in this instance?

[Jay Donnell]

Hey!

The 'internal contradiction' mentioned here involves how the opponents to the abiogenic theory based their objections largely due to their "charge that hydrocarbons could not exist in the mantle," then the proponents go on to discount their objection by stating that "other types of carbon exist in the mantle: unoxidized carbon must exist there, because diamonds are formed within the mantle before being brought to the surface by eruptive processes."

An internal contradiction can typically be defined as reasoning based upon two contrasting notions, such as doing something 'accidentally on purpose'.

Admittedly, it feels like this is a poor choice of the term in this situation, but that 'internal contradiction' refers to how the opponents objection was based on a notion that just wasn't true. 'Contrary evidence' or even 'counterexample' would have felt a bit better here, but if I could always get what I want I'd be writing this from a yacht in Tahiti

[T.B.Justin]

Hey Jay,

Ok, so more or less I was on point with the internal contradiction of the proponents and opponents notion, since unoxidized carbon must exist in the mantle, therefore the opponents idea that that cannot be true is false.

Thank you for helping with the clarity!

[bebeg3168]

Hi,
On answer choice A. I feel this is incorrect because it states that "It presents a view...". This would be inaccurate because this question is talking about the 3rd paragraph.....2 views were already established. I'm trying to read into these answers a little more and be critical of what they are stating. Thanks

[Robert Carroll]

Bebe,

Exactly right! The views were already introduced earlier, so this paragraph does not perform the function of presenting any additional view.

Robert Carroll