PrepTest 110, Section 2, Question 12
The five senses have traditionally been viewed as(73 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- ASynesthesiacs demonstrate a(11 more words not shown)
- BRecent evidence strongly(13 more words not shown)
- CThe particular ways(11 more words not shown)
- DThe synesthetic phenomenon(9 more words not shown)
- ESynesthesiacs can be(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Saying “I taste blue” is one thing. Establishing that taste and vision are actually overlapping is another.
The research gives us people's descriptions of their experiences: a banana tastes blue, or a color has a smell. Those reports are interesting, but how much can we infer from them? The author takes them as evidence that these people's senses cross the usual boundaries. I'd want to know whether the reports reliably establish that kind of sensory overlap.
The traditional account may deserve questioning too. I might wonder, for example, how sharply taste and smell are separated. But that question alone doesn't verify these particular reports. We need to examine the evidence for the author's conclusion rather than simply choosing between two accounts because one sounds plausible.
What we’re looking for
For a weakener, I'd look for a reason not to take the reported descriptions as reliable evidence of the claimed experience. Can the reports be confirmed, or might something other than overlapping senses account for what people say? We don't have to prove that such experiences never occur; we need to weaken this argument for them.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
A systematic difficulty using and understanding words gives us another explanation for the unusual descriptions. Someone might use a word for a color when describing a taste because of a language problem, rather than because seeing and tasting actually overlap.
The argument relies on what people say to establish what is happening with their senses. A directly weakens that connection. It doesn't require us to accuse anyone of lying: a sincere report can still be unreliable evidence if the words aren't being used in the expected way.
- B
Additional senses wouldn't establish whether the familiar senses cross the boundaries described in the passage. The issue isn't whether the traditional list has the correct number of entries. It's whether these reports show an overlap between senses. B changes the list without challenging that inference.
- C
A definite pattern in the overlap doesn't undermine the claim that overlap occurs. It could make the phenomenon more coherent and worth investigating. We shouldn't turn “a pattern” into proof that every person has the same experience, but nothing here gives us a reason to reject the author's interpretation.
- D
Descriptions in legends don't show that the modern reports are mistaken. Nor would legends by themselves prove the phenomenon real. This adds a history of descriptions without supplying a problem with the evidence the argument relies on.
- E
Temporarily eliminating the experiences through drugs is compatible with their existing in the first place. A way to change an experience doesn't show that the experience was merely an inaccurate description. E therefore doesn't weaken the move we were questioning.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.