Q16

[helonmelen]

I understood the structure of the passage to be: a brief discussion of thesis/antithesis, an example of such a pairing, and a conclusion that goes beyond the initial discussion of thesis/antithesis by explaining the synthesis of cytology and biochemistry.

Based on this, I narrowed the answer choices down to B and C. Each seemed to only cover the first or last 2/3 of the passage; I thought it would be correct to state that there was first a general proposition (in science, a thesis usually comes with an antithesis, and they are related in this way), an example, and a conclusion (they reach a synthesis, and help each other progress -- neither is mentioned in the first paragraph).

The Kaplan explanation says that B is incorrect because it's not a "set" of examples, it's only one example. This just confuses me further because I thought that the cytology/biochemistry example could very well be defined as a set of examples that go together and are both necessary and complementary to the full set of the example (cytology + biochem = molecular genetics)

I would greatly appreciate any insight! Thanks!

[bbirdwell]

I agree this isn't a great question -- if I were you I would stick to much more recent preptests, as the test has evolved.

Here's how I see the passage:

"¢ Sometimes disciplines are related thesis/antithesis
"¢ example: biochem/cytology, blablabla
"¢ sometimes this has important results, like biochem/cytology

In this sense, there's a general idea, and then one example: the relationship of biochem to cytology.

So, for (B), there's not a "set" of examples, there's just one, and a conclusion isn't really drawn from it Plus the first paragraph, where the initial framework is set up, is ignored.

[slimjimsquinn]

This question stumped me. There was no mention of the enzyme theory of life.

Is A) the answer because enzyme deals within cellular structures and theory of life deal with biology? Hence, their synthesis?

Also would appreciate tips on condensing, making sense of science passages.

Thanks!

[WaltGrace1983]

This question stumped me. There was no mention of the enzyme theory of life.

Is A) the answer because enzyme deals within cellular structures and theory of life deal with biology? Hence, their synthesis?

Also would appreciate tips on condensing, making sense of science passages.

Thanks!

I think you are looking for Q #14!

[WaltGrace1983]

I agree this isn't a great question -- if I were you I would stick to much more recent preptests, as the test has evolved.

Here's how I see the passage:

"¢ Sometimes disciplines are related thesis/antithesis
"¢ example: biochem/cytology, blablabla
"¢ sometimes this has important results, like biochem/cytology

In this sense, there's a general idea, and then one example: the relationship of biochem to cytology.

So, for (B), there's not a "set" of examples, there's just one, and a conclusion isn't really drawn from it Plus the first paragraph, where the initial framework is set up, is ignored.

By this reasoning, I am really wondering why it is NOT okay to ignore the first paragraph but it IS okay to ignore the last where the conclusion is given?

[maryadkins]

Well, I think I agree with Brian that a conclusion ISN'T really drawn from the example(s). So it's not ignoring a conclusion so much as there isn't one.

But I also agree with Brian that I'd focus on more recent tests for distilling good strategy...this one is super old.

[JohnD194]

Any update on this explanation? Don't see why D is wrong and why C is right?

[ohthatpatrick]

Having never seen this Q, my unvarnished prediction for organization is:

- Description of a trend in science
- A specific example of this trend, going from the initial conflict between a thesis and antithesis discipline to their eventual synthesis
- Someone's observation about the importance of this trend in science


ANSWERS
(A) This would go straight from first paragraph to last paragraph. Not comfortable skipping over the example.

(B) This did not begin with a set of examples, nor IS there a set of examples. There's one example.

(C) Not wrong, but it leaves off the final paragraph. Keep it?

(D) A statement of principles? I don't really know what that means. Were there laws or normative claims laid out in the first paragraph? It didn't seem like it. It was just historically descriptive, not a statement of axioms.

Also, there is no debate anywhere in the passage. The author tells us a specific story about a thesis and antithesis discipline. A rationale for why that thesis/antithesis tension can have important results is discussed, but nothing is debated (that word implies the existence of at least two opposing views).

(E) Problem? Solution? Not a match at all.


Final analysis:
(B), (D), and (E) all said stuff that just didn't happen.


(A) and (C) are both true, but incomplete.

(A) describes the 1st and the 5th paragraph.
(C) describes the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th paragraphs.

So (C) wins.