PrepTest 115, Section 4, Question 14
The mathematics of the scientific theory known as(83 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- AIf computerized models(16 more words not shown)
- BIf a scientific(16 more words not shown)
- CIf actual phenomena(20 more words not shown)
- DIf they evolve(18 more words not shown)
- EIf computers verify(19 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The sand dune makes the abstract language easier to follow. It generally keeps its shape, but a little added sand can set off a slide. So we aren't describing either something that never changes or something changing unpredictably all the time. Complexity is the theory meant to describe that sort of behavior.
Now the scientists build computer models using the theory, and those models develop much as the real things do. I can see why that looks promising. But the conclusion concerns the theory being correct, while the observation concerns how its models behave. We need a rule connecting those two things.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for a principle that justifies the scientists' conclusion. I'd predict: when a theory's computer models behave like the real things they represent, that gives us good reason to think the theory is correct. Notice the modest conclusion. The scientists claim good evidence, not absolute certainty.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The theory's models behave like their real-world counterparts, and A says that when models do that, the theory is probably correct. That connects the observed success of these models with the credibility of complexity. “Probably correct” fits a conclusion about good evidence; we don't need a rule guaranteeing that a successful model can never come from a mistaken theory.
- B
This starts with the very thing we're trying to support: a correct theory. It then says its models will behave like the real world. But our evidence starts at the other end, with models that behave like the real world, and we want to reach a judgment about the theory.
Both a correct theory and an incorrect theory could conceivably produce similar-looking model behavior. B tells us what to expect if the theory is correct; it doesn't tell us that this behavior is evidence of correctness. A supplies that needed direction.
- C
Eventually discovering the right mathematics is different from having evidence that the current theory is correct. A computer might someday discover a better theory that replaces complexity. C offers a prediction about future discovery without supporting the scientists' present assessment.
- D
The passage says the models evolve “much like” the real phenomena. D requires an exact match before its rule applies, so the stated evidence doesn't establish its starting condition.
Even setting that aside, its result describes the models as neither purely stable nor purely chaotic. We need a connection to the theory's being probably correct, not just another description of the models' behavior.
- E
No mathematical errors have been identified. This rule would apply if computers found errors and would support thinking a theory incorrect. The scientists instead cite a successful resemblance as evidence in favor of their theory. E doesn't connect their evidence to their conclusion.
More Sufficient Assumption questions
- PrepTest 115, Section 2, Question 21Sufficient Assumption
- PrepTest 115, Section 4, Question 17Sufficient Assumption
- Logical Reasoning Drill Set 10, Question 1Sufficient Assumption
- Logical Reasoning Drill Set 12, Question 4Sufficient Assumption
- Logical Reasoning Drill Set 13, Question 1Sufficient Assumption
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Sufficient Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.