Q12 - People have long been fascinated

[monygg85]

Got this one wrong while practicing. So I figured I'd give it a shot here. I think I understand why I got it wrong and why the 4 AC's are wrong. I think we are being asked for the argument structure here...

Argument summary: Researchers throughout the years, investigating telepathy, have not been able to attain definitive evidence confirming its existence. Regardless there are some who believe in it since SOME research supporting it does exist. Despite that, it can be shown that other explanations that comply with the known laws can be given. So its too early to conclude that telepathy is another way to communicate.

(A) is correct because the author mentions that there are some researchers who believe in telepathy because of some evidence but quickly dismisses this because other explanations can be given that are more realistic. To me, thats calling the evidence presented inadequate.

(B) I found no mention of any experiments in the stimulus

(C) The author didn't overgeneralize anything. Plus, there was no actual, specific, evidence brought up for either side of the point.

(D) I picked this during practice. I thought it was right since the part in the conclusion that says "alternative means of communication" was not mentioned or in my mind even implied in the stimulus. I didnt think I needed to assume that telepathy is an actual alternative way of communication.

(E) He did offer support to his conclusion by shooting down other possible evidence and showing that there hasn't been any confirming evidence.

Feel free to pick apart my explanations here! Also an explanation as to what the phrase "alternative means of communication" has to do with the stimulus would be nice

Thanks guys!

[tommywallach]

Hey Mony,

Great review of this! I love everything you did, from the breakdown of the argument to the explanation of the answer choices.

I think the thing that got you on (D) is that you misinterpreted it.

Here's what it says: draws a conclusion that is not supported by the premises.

Here's what you read: draws a conclusion that is not definitively proven by the premises.

In other words, answer choice (D) would only apply if the premises had nothing to do with the conclusion. Or, perhaps the issue was more just the world "alternative," though it is used in a fairly normal way here. Let's go to the dictionary!

alternative |ôlˈtərnətiv|
adjective [ attrib. ]
(of one or more things) available as another possibility: the various alternative methods for resolving disputes | the alternative definition of democracy as popular power.
"¢ (of two things) mutually exclusive: the facts fit two alternative scenarios.
"¢ of or relating to behavior that is considered unconventional and is often seen as a challenge to traditional norms: an alternative lifestyle | they have one foot in alternative music and the other in rock.

The first definition would work here, as in telepathy could be "available as another possibility" for communication (outside of the ones we know). The second definition doesn't work. I suppose the third one could work, as well!

Hope that helps!

-t

[monygg85]

Great explanation, I didn't think of it like that! I guess when I came to the conclusion and was hit with words not used in the premises I automatically thought that must have been the problem. Although I have a question now that I think about it.

If that actually was the correct answer to this, or even something similar just as long as it describes a problem in the argument, would't that make this an identify the flaw question type instead of an argument structure?

Thanks

[tommywallach]

I'd still call it a procedure question, but honestly, the names can get a little confusing (I've seen inference questions that blend with explain a result), so it's no big deal either way!

-t

[sweetsecret]

Can you say D is incorrect because some research supporting the view that telepathy exists is not linked or connected with alternative means of communication and therefore the conclusion is provided with support in the premises?

i.e. if it was connected to alternative means of communication then D would be correct..

[AndreD935]

Hey Everyone,

After reading all of these posts I feel like I've got a better understanding of the question and thought I'd share a little more of a structured breakdown explaining why answer choice A is correct.

So in the stimulus the conclusion states that: "It is premature to conclude that telepathy is an alternative means of communication".

Answer choice A) states that: the author, "supports (the conclusion stated above) by pointing to the inadequacy of evidence for the opposite view"

The next step is to identify what the opposite view is. I believe the opposite view is: "It is NOT premature to conclude that telepathy is an alternative means of communication".

Now let's find the evidence the author uses to support this opposite view: in the stimulus the author points out that "some research seems to support the view that telepathy exists"

Finally, let's find where in the stimulus the author shows the inadequacy of the evidence given for the opposite view, they state that "However, it can often be shown that other explanations that do comply with known laws can be given".

So, there you go. The author supports their own conclusion (It is premature to conclude...) by showing that the evidence (some research seems to support...) used to support the opposite view (It is NOT premature to conclude...) is inadequate (However, it can often...)

I hope this detailed breakdown helps!

[AnnaC659]

Hi, thanks for all the threads above.

I just wanted to ask.. During timed practice, I couldn't really get my head around this stimulus because of this particular sentence: "However, it can often be shown that other explanations that do comply with known laws can be given." I couldn't see how this sentence related to the previous ones or the later one. Redoing it I think I understood but just wanted to double check. So here the "known laws" it refers to the widely agreed perspective that telepathy doesn't exist, am I correct?

[ohthatpatrick]

Yeah, basically. Think of it more like "known laws" = "normal, current science".

We already know a lot about what exists in the world, and scientists have derived many laws.

Telepathy is certainly not an accepted component of the normal scientific worldview. We're wondering / researching whether telepathy actually exists.

We definitely haven't found any conclusive proof that it does.
We HAVE had some experiments whose data suggests that telepathy might be at play.
But, there are "more conventional" explanations for the same data.
So these experiments don't count as strong evidence for a phenomenon that we otherwise have no reason to believe exists.

Have you ever heard of Ockham's Razor? It's the idea that, all things being equal, the simpler explanation is the better one (it's literally saying "refrain from creating superfluous entities").

If we have some data from an experiment that COULD be explained by telepathy,
but it also COULD be explained by conventional science (known laws), then we'd lean towards believing that the conventional explanations are the real ones.