Q25

User avatar
 
LSAT-Chang
Thanks Received: 38
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 479
Joined: June 03rd, 2011
 
 
trophy
Most Thankful
trophy
First Responder
 

Q25

by LSAT-Chang Mon Sep 12, 2011 6:19 pm

Why can't E be correct?? I do not see how the purpose was to contrast the traditional approach to studying the mind with the approach advocated by objectivists. It seems more like it is written to support the objectivists' approach but not really to contrast the two approaches (I mean, the objectivists' approach is basically what the scientists' approach is) -- any thoughts??????? :shock:
 
theonlyrij
Thanks Received: 1
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 13
Joined: March 26th, 2011
 
 
 

Re: Q25

by theonlyrij Fri Sep 23, 2011 1:08 am

Hey So,

I think the reason that E cannot be correct is because the objectivists don't actually explain why chemistry etc have been successful. He just states that the objective view has been successful in these disciplines.

I picked C and I am having trouble figuring out why C is wrong. Have any ideas? I thought C was correct because if the objective view has been so successful with those 3 disciplines, then scientists shouldn't concern themselves with describing how a phenomenon feels inside because they don't need to.

I still do not see why A is correct! Any help?

Thanks!
User avatar
 
LSAT-Chang
Thanks Received: 38
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 479
Joined: June 03rd, 2011
 
 
trophy
Most Thankful
trophy
First Responder
 

Re: Q25

by LSAT-Chang Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:05 pm

theonlyrij Wrote:
I picked C and I am having trouble figuring out why C is wrong. Have any ideas? I thought C was correct because if the objective view has been so successful with those 3 disciplines, then scientists shouldn't concern themselves with describing how a phenomenon feels inside because they don't need to.


Hey Rijon! :)
I think the main reason why you should eliminate (C) is because we are asked why the AUTHOR discusses that. Answer choice (C) sounds like as if the author is siding with the scientists and that he/she is against the subjective philosophers. It could never be possible for the author to primarily discuss something in order to side with one when in fact, he/she is neutral (like in this case).

Now that I read the first paragraph again, it seems like the author is basically outlining facts about what these "some philosophers (line 1) think -- and there is really not much of an author's opinion in this whole paragraph, so I think that may satisfy why answer choice (A) would be the "best" answer here -- I definitely think this is one of those many questions where we just have to stick with the "least wrong" answer!
User avatar
 
maryadkins
Thanks Received: 641
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: March 23rd, 2011
 
 
 

Re: Q25

by maryadkins Mon Sep 26, 2011 2:35 pm

changsoyeon Wrote:Now that I read the first paragraph again, it seems like the author is basically outlining facts about what these "some philosophers (line 1) think -- and there is really not much of an author's opinion in this whole paragraph, so I think that may satisfy why answer choice (A) would be the "best" answer here -- I definitely think this is one of those many questions where we just have to stick with the "least wrong" answer!


Yes! On questions that ask you for the author's purpose and reference specific line numbers, you must consider what the purpose is in the context of that part of the passage. Here, we haven't even gotten into an argument yet; the author is just laying out facts. The point is to distinguish between the two approaches to studying the mind, which is (A).
 
gplaya123
Thanks Received: 15
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 90
Joined: September 04th, 2012
 
 
 

Re: Q25

by gplaya123 Sun Oct 28, 2012 2:13 pm

I think E is a trap answer because E directly paraphrases the line 14 - 19.
However, that's not why author wrote that...

C is wrong because C is definitely an answer that explains why scientists are more concerned with scientific facts rather than anything else. However, this is not why author wrote. Author wrote it to compare and contrast of how philosophers and scientists take different approaches to the exploration of mind in order to back up his argument about how scientists' and philosophers have radically different beliefs.