PrepTest 159, Section 3, Question 20
Essayist: Since ancient times humans have relied on(86 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(10 more words not shown)
- AScience is at(12 more words not shown)
- BScience is no(10 more words not shown)
- CScience is only(2 more words not shown)
- DScience is merely(2 more words not shown)
- EScience, like stories(13 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Explaining our place in the world is one thing science and ancient myths can have in common. That doesn't make them identical in every respect. So I'm watching how far the essayist takes that comparison.
Then comes a definition I want to question: truth is a matter of helping us cope with the human condition. I'd normally ask whether a claim accurately describes the world, not whether it helps us cope. But the essayist is giving us that standard as a premise. To understand this argument, we need to follow how the essayist uses it, even if we wouldn't choose that definition ourselves.
What we’re looking for
Under that standard, the essayist says science has some successes but falls short of complete truth because it contributes to the breakdown of important institutions. I might want examples before accepting that broad claim about institutions. Still, the conclusion question doesn't ask us to verify it. It asks what the essayist is trying to establish: science isn't fully true. The alleged institutional damage is offered as the reason.
Working the answers
- A
This is the supporting claim about institutional damage. The essayist says science's lack of complete truth is “demonstrated by” that damage. That language makes the direction clear: the damage is evidence for the conclusion about truth, not the conclusion itself.
- B
The essayist doesn't establish a tie between science and Homeric myth in how true they are. Sharing an explanatory purpose and being judged by the same proposed standard doesn't mean receiving the same verdict under that standard. The conclusion is that science isn't completely true, not that it is no truer than those stories.
- CCorrect
Science is only partially true. This combines the concession that science has successes with the stated conclusion that it falls short of complete truth. We don't have to agree with the essayist's definition of truth to recognize this as the point being argued.
- D
The initial comparison is limited: both science and myth try to explain our place in the cosmos. The essayist doesn't conclude from that shared feature that science is merely a myth. D turns a particular similarity into a broader identification the argument doesn't make.
- E
This is the shared purpose introduced near the beginning. It sets up the essayist's comparison and proposed way of judging truth. The argument then goes on to a verdict about science's incomplete truth, which E leaves out.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.