Which lines allow us to choose (A)?
I thought L53-55 maybe related to it, but not sure whether I understand the question correctly...also, although I think A is better than C, not exactly sure why (C) is incorrect...
Thank you
LSAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- rinagoldfield
-
Thanks Received: 309
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 390
- Joined: December 13th, 2011
- This post thanked 2 times.
Re: Q14
Hey TZ!
First, let's look at the big picture. The author of the passage argues that there is a discrepancy between 17th century scientists’ accounts of their experiments and how their experiments actually went down. Scientists like Robert Boyle implied that they performed all of their own lab work, yet they actually relied on the work of many paid technicians. These paid technicians never got credit for their work.
Question 14 asks how the author’s discussion of the "wage relationship" fits into this bigger narrative. The author describes how wage laborers "were perceived as ultimately dependent on their wage and thus controlled by the will of their employers" (lines 51-53). The employers ran the show, paid the bills, and therefore got full credit for the laborers’ creative contributions (lines 60-65).
(A) is supported by lines 50-53 and 60-65. The authors’ discussion of the wage relationship provides context for her analysis of why "wage laborers" got no credit for their work.
(B) misinterprets the author’s thesis. The passage concerns how discoveries are attributed, not the nature of discovery itself.
(C) is also unsupported. The author never implies that scientists were reluctant to have technicians perform "anything but the most menial tasks." The technicians may in fact have performed elaborate intellectual tasks"”indeed, they "might have made the apparatus work" (line 61)"”but they got no credit for their contributions.
(D) is out of scope. No changes are discussed.
(E) is tempting, since the author disagrees with the popular depiction of scientific discovery as an individual scientist’s Eureka!-like moment (lines 35-39). But the author discusses this popular depiction in the context of her greater point about why 17th century technicians didn’t get credit for their scientific work. Her discussion of wage labor is also context for this greater point.
Hope that helps.
--Rina
First, let's look at the big picture. The author of the passage argues that there is a discrepancy between 17th century scientists’ accounts of their experiments and how their experiments actually went down. Scientists like Robert Boyle implied that they performed all of their own lab work, yet they actually relied on the work of many paid technicians. These paid technicians never got credit for their work.
Question 14 asks how the author’s discussion of the "wage relationship" fits into this bigger narrative. The author describes how wage laborers "were perceived as ultimately dependent on their wage and thus controlled by the will of their employers" (lines 51-53). The employers ran the show, paid the bills, and therefore got full credit for the laborers’ creative contributions (lines 60-65).
(A) is supported by lines 50-53 and 60-65. The authors’ discussion of the wage relationship provides context for her analysis of why "wage laborers" got no credit for their work.
(B) misinterprets the author’s thesis. The passage concerns how discoveries are attributed, not the nature of discovery itself.
(C) is also unsupported. The author never implies that scientists were reluctant to have technicians perform "anything but the most menial tasks." The technicians may in fact have performed elaborate intellectual tasks"”indeed, they "might have made the apparatus work" (line 61)"”but they got no credit for their contributions.
(D) is out of scope. No changes are discussed.
(E) is tempting, since the author disagrees with the popular depiction of scientific discovery as an individual scientist’s Eureka!-like moment (lines 35-39). But the author discusses this popular depiction in the context of her greater point about why 17th century technicians didn’t get credit for their scientific work. Her discussion of wage labor is also context for this greater point.
Hope that helps.
--Rina
2 posts Page 1 of 1