Q24 - Psychologist: Some psychologists mistakenly

[mrudula_2005]

Hi,

I was wondering if you could help my figure out what makes E the correct answer over D?

E states "It is used to undermine a claim that some psychologists use to argue against a view of Freud's" - what claim is that? The claim that dreams result from electrical discharges or the claim that dreams must be understood purely in terms of their physiological function, or the whole reasoning that "because dreams result from electrical discharges in the brain, they must be understood purely in terms of their physiological function?" or that "dreams reveal nothing about the dreamer"?

Can you help me see how the statement in question "that dream content varies enormously" undermines any of these claims?

I felt like the author included that statement of dream content varying enormously merely to indicate that the physiological explanation for dreaming is not a complete one (hence why I chose D).

many thanks

[mrudula_2005]

oh I think I just got it after re-reading the stimulus. the psychologists claim that "because dreams result from electrical discharges in the brain, they must be understood PURELY in terms of physiological function" and then the author undermines this claim by stating "But since dream content various enormously...they [electrical discharges] cannot completely explain the phenomenon of dreaming."

Now I see how that statement about dream content varying enormously is used to undermine a claim that some psychologists use, but I still don't see how D is so off? is it because illustrating the difficulty of providing a complete explanation is not exactly the primary function of the statement? or is the statement not even illustrating that providing a complete explanation of the phenomenon of dreaming is difficult per se, just that one explanation (the physiological one) is not complete in and of itself?

thanks

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Looks like you've already been able to work your way through this one!

Just for clarification and confirmation then...

Some psychologists argue that _____ .

_____ runs counter to Freud.

We then get a piece of evidence that would challenge the psychologists claim.

We're asked to describe the role of the piece of evidence. And that role is to undermine the psychologists claim.

(A) is the opposite of what we're looking for.
(B) is not true. This conclusion was never explicitly stated.
(C) is not true. This statement is not meant to challenge Freud, but rather just the psychologists.
(D) is close but not quite for two reasons. The purpose of the claim is to challenge the psychologists, not to prove an intermediate conclusion. And along the way it does support the claim that electrical discharges cannot completely explain the phenomenon of dreaming, but the claim is not really an illustration of this but rather a premise upon which this intermediate conclusion is based.
(E) correctly describes the role of the claim. It is used to challenge the psychologists' claim. And the psychologists' claim does run counter to Freud.

Does that help at all? I think you were already there though. Good work!

[netkorea06]

What is the conclusion of this passage? I thought that conclusion was the last sentence. (They cannot completely~) And 'dream content varies enormously' is the premise of the conclusion. Is it not?

[zainrizvi]

Maybe I'm just nit picking but is it really USED to undermine a claim? I thought it was used to SUPPORT a conclusion that undermines the claim... or is that they same thing?

[bfleisch123]

mshermn, I think there is one more problem with (D). If you said this and I misunderstood, or if you simply think I'm mistaken, please let me know. (D) states that the role of the claim concerning the variations in dream content is to "illustrate THE DIFFICULTY OF PROVIDING A COMPLETE EXPLANATION of the phenomenan of dreaming".

But the claim does not do this. Rather, it provides evidence that physiological explanations ALONE do not give a complete explanation. Put differently, i doesn't even address any in principle claims about about providing a complete explanation of dreaming. It only says that physiology isn't enough. So it can't serve the purpose D states.

I'm taking the test next Saturday, and I think a general point is worth making: Noah and others have stated repeatedly on this site. Usually, language is used in a looser fashion early in the LR sections, and tightens up later in the section. All the more important to keep in mind later on in the section when I feel eliminating wrong answers is vital. This has helped me a lot to go from (-4 to -5) to (-1 to -2) in my sections. Probably could have posted this in the general forum, but I think its useful in the context of this question. (p.s. what do I know, I picked (d) io my practice test).

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

You guys have a great discussion going here! Let me just add a few thoughts...

What is the conclusion of this passage? I thought that conclusion was the last sentence. (They cannot completely~) And 'dream content varies enormously' is the premise of the conclusion. Is it not?

I think you've convinced me... The psychologists conclusion is that "they [electrical impulses] cannot completely explain the phenomenon of dreaming." One might say it differently, "the [other] psychologists are wrong." But essentially those are the same claims, so nice work netkorea06!

Maybe I'm just nit picking but is it really USED to undermine a claim? I thought it was used to SUPPORT a conclusion that undermines the claim... or is that they same thing?

I see your point, but yeah, I'd so those are essentially the same thing.

@bfleisch123: I think you're right on. Refuting one explanation does not equate to illustrating the difficulty of providing a complete explanation. Happy to hear that you found the tip on being sticky with language so helpful. Hopefully you were able to employ that on test day!

[agersh144]

I was torn between B and E and agonized for like 3 minutes between them -- can someone please breakdown the premises and conclusion and explain why B is wrong -- thanks!

[Crogati]

Here is a break down of the agrument which follows the classic structure:

"SOME people think, etc.."
followed by "BUT, HOWEVER,"
"THUS these people are wrong"

Claim by psychologists:
Dreams result from electrical currents, so they must be understood purely in terms of their physiological function. Thus, these psychs conclude, against Freud's view, that dreams reveal nothing about the character of dreams.

Pivot point (this is when you know to get ready for the counter claim):
BUT since dream content varies...

Author concedes to the Psychs:
EVEN IF electrical discharges provide the terms of the physiological explanation (stated by psychologists)

Author's opinion:
Psychologists cannot completely explain the phenomenon of dreaming. In other words, Psychologists are wrong.

Since the Psychologists disagree with Freud and the Author disagrees with the Pyschologists, I think we can infer the Author agrees with Freud.

[amil91]

I was torn between B and E and agonized for like 3 minutes between them -- can someone please breakdown the premises and conclusion and explain why B is wrong -- thanks!

I think the problem with B is, and why I crossed it out on first read, is that it says something is explicitly stated that isn't. In fact the stimulus says nothing about a fully satisfactory satisfactory account of dreams, it simply says the electrical discharge method is incomplete.