PrepTest 128, Section 2, Question 24
Clarissa: The natural sciences would not have made(48 more words not shown)
Clarissa and Myungsook's statements provide(10 more words not shown)
- Amathematics has been(11 more words not shown)
- Bconverting observations into(5 more words not shown)
- Cnot all observations(7 more words not shown)
- Dsuccessfully doing natural(12 more words not shown)
- Euseful scientific theories(5 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Mathematics has helped the sciences advance. That first claim is easy to understand. Clarissa then makes a stronger claim: an observation doesn't deserve serious attention until it has been stated precisely in quantitative terms.
Why wait for exact numbers before taking an observation seriously? Suppose we notice that people with a certain disease keep dying. We could have a reason to investigate before knowing whether the death rate is 90 percent or 95 percent. Precision may matter without being the first step.
That is where Myungsook pushes back. Converting observations into numbers is the last task and requires thoroughly exploring those observations first. 'I disagree' doesn't tell us by itself which of Clarissa's claims is being rejected; Myungsook's explanation identifies the target.
What we’re looking for
For the disagreement question, look for the value of careful investigation before precise quantification. Clarissa denies that such observations deserve serious attention. Myungsook treats exploring them as necessary preparation for quantifying them. They needn't disagree about mathematics being valuable.
Working the answers
- A
This is Clarissa's first claim, but Myungsook doesn't deny it. Saying quantification comes after careful exploration is compatible with mathematics being highly important to scientific progress. We cannot treat 'I disagree' as a rejection of every statement Clarissa made.
- B
Myungsook does call conversion into numbers the hardest task. Clarissa, however, doesn't say it is easy. Insisting that something is required before an observation merits attention doesn't imply that doing it is easy. We have a view from one speaker without a conflicting view from the other.
- C
Neither speaker says that some observations can never be quantified precisely. Myungsook says prior exploration is required; that is a claim about preparation, not impossibility. Clarissa's insistence on quantification also doesn't tell us whether every observation can satisfy it.
- DCorrect
Myungsook says observations must be thoroughly explored before they can be converted into numbers, so successful science requires careful attention to observations that aren't yet precisely quantified. Clarissa says those observations aren't worth serious attention. That is the direct conflict D identifies.
- E
They can agree that useful scientific theories require mathematics while disagreeing about what researchers must do before applying it. Myungsook's claim that quantification comes last doesn't make it unnecessary. We don't have opposing positions on E's requirement.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.