Q22

[LSAT-Chang]

Hello,
I'm a little confused as to what the difference is between answer choices A, B, and E. I was down to those 3, and eventually picked E. I didn't pick A because I wasn't sure if "conceptions of evidence" = "assumptions", but it could mean "beliefs" so now I am unsure as to what the difference is between A and B. I didn't pick B because of the word "only if"... could someone help me out please?

[wj097]

3rd paragraph gives all the reasons why A/E dont work but B does.

(A) Author believes it CAN be overcome with investigation into the authority of the evidences (line 50-53)

(B) Author specifically mentions in line 50 & 47 that assessing authority (aka the common ground) of the evidences is REQUIRED, which allows for such strong word as ONLY IF

(E) Line 53-58 shows 3 ways how we can resolve this issue, so can't say that failing one way will prevent progress; what about 2 other ways!!

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Nice explanation wj097!

Answer choice (B) most likely reflects the author's belief about the impasse and is supported by synthesizing two pieces of information: lines 35-36 and lines 50-53.

Incorrect Answers
(A) contradicts the passage. The author specifically addresses what is required to resolve the debate.
(C) is unsupported. The author never suggests that either position is right or that both positions are each partially right.
(D) contradicts the passage. The author compares the impasse to a debate between adherents of different religions in which the author says there is little hope of convincing either side to listen to the other.
(E) contradicts the passage as the author does not believe that alternative ways of gaining knowledge about the mind are needed. The author provides a means of resolving the impasse by assessing the authority of the subjectivist and objectivist views.

[Cielo]

Hello,

I chose C as an answer. I spotted the relevant part of the passage when I was solving it, which is line 53,
where it says what would be required to resolve the debate is an investigation into the authority of their differing perspective.

Isn't "investigation into the authority of their different perspective" similar to the accurate understanding of mind requires both types of evidence, since different perspective means both subjectivists/objectivists?


Thanks.

[emily315]

Im also confused about the common ground rhetoric. Where in the passage did the author says common ground? It just mentioned the study of Epitemology, right....how did that constitute as common ground as in B, not as study of both types of evidence as in C?

[ohthatpatrick]

Lines 35-40 say that reasoned discourse requires shared assumptions or beliefs.

Reasoned discourse ---only if---> shared assumptions or belief.

It also says that the two parties "lack a common context". So from 35-40, we can justify the 'common ground' wording.

[hnadgauda]

Prephrase: The author thinks the current impasse seems unresolvable but has potential to be resolved IF they investigate the authority of their differing perspectives.

A: Author thinks the impasse can be overcome. Eliminate.
B: Sounds right.
C: No, this isn't what the author says.
D: There isn't any misunderstanding.
E: No, the author doesn't say this.

B is the only answer that comes close to what is said in the passage. The trend for these RC questions seems to be that the correct answer is something that is in the passage. All the incorrect answers "sound" good but are ultimately incorrect because they have no sound basis from the passage!