Q28

[rsm133]

Could anyone explain the logic behind choosing correct answer choice (E)? I keep leaning toward (B), because the example in the passage says "investigation into the authority of the texts" is necessary, and that seems to align with investigation into the validity of the eyewitnesses in the answer choice. Thank you.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

So the debate described in the hypothetical example in the fourth paragraph is between two adherents of different religions. Keep in mind that these adherents firmly believe in the correctness of their position. Outsiders however, would need further investigation to determine the correctness of one adherent or the other. But the debate is between adherents, and this is an important point.

In answer choice (B) the debate is among jurors who are not certain in the correctness of the views of the eyewitnesses.

In answer choice (E) the debate is among historians who have themselves drawn conclusions, just as in the fourth paragraph the adherents have drawn conclusions regarding the correctness of their respective sacred texts.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that in answer choice (B) the debate is among the wrong group of people.

Does that clear this one up?

[theonlyrij]

I kind of understand what you are saying about E. But I just don't see the difference between E and C?

I just chose C because to me it seemed when it said that there is no evidence to verify either's claim, that like religion, there is no evidence to prove who is wrong or right.

Any clarification would be great! Thanks in advance!

[Turismo1]

This may be too late, but the similarities/difference between answer choice C and E and how they relate to the debate illustrated in the fourth paragraph of the text, is that the religious debaters in the fourth paragraph are basing their arguments from their religious texts whereas in C, the archaeologists have no evidence as the basis for their claims, whereas in E the historians are each drawing their conclusions based on different types of historical data (similar to the way the religious debates base their arguments on different religious texts).

^ mirin' long sentence?

[gplaya123]

I got this one...
This is the initial approach:
according to the 4th P,
the answer choice should contain
1) something that indicates people should talk about only one topic (creation of world)
2) Competing conclusions in regards to that topic (how the world has come about)
3) Various sources of evidences in regards to that topic (different sacred texts)

Now, if you were to have those, it's really hard to discern which one is right...
because like
A: they are talking about one topic (identity)
there have various evidences about it (crime scene)

So how is E different from all of A,B,C,D?

Here is my finding.
If you read 4th paragraph carefully, you can see that it is a debate among religious people. THE ESSENTIAL POINT that you need to understand is that they are already have DRAWN THEIR CONCLUSION BASED ON THE EVIDENCES.
Line 43 says that each religion is confident...yes, each is confident and certain how the world has come about.
In other words, they are the believers of their belief and have done all the researches already before having a debate.
This element is not included in A,B,C,D.

However, E is different: the historians already have also drawn their conclusions before they have their debate from competing resources.
Also, E contains all 3 of the elements that I have mentioned up there.
This question asks for the MOST similar one.
E definitely has the one element that 4th P has presented that other answer choices lack.
hope this helps

[OliviaB660]

So the debate described in the hypothetical example in the fourth paragraph is between two adherents of different religions. Keep in mind that these adherents firmly believe in the correctness of their position. Outsiders however, would need further investigation to determine the correctness of one adherent or the other. But the debate is between adherents, and this is an important point.

(I'm sorry if this is confusing/scattered -- I have spent wayyyyy too much time thinking about this question!)

The question asks which debate is most analogous. I don't understand why the convictions/beliefs of the debaters are more important than the subject of/basis for/evidence centered in the debate.

I do, of course, get that the beliefs of the debaters play a major role in determining the nature of the debate (two staunch believers in different religions would have a different type of creation debate than, say, either one might have with a cosmologist). But it doesn't seem like that's the only important factor here, in my opinion.

Answer choice E says that the historians' opinions are based on "different types of historical data." This implies that each historian is not taking the existence of the competing data into consideration. But in the case of the religious adherents, they have ACCESS to (and maybe familiarity with) each other's evidence (their respective religious texts), they just believe in their own. And these religious texts are the same TYPE of evidence, unlike the historians'.

Answer choice B makes a lot more sense to me. The jurors are comparing like and like (eyewitness accounts). Because the evidence is conflicting, there would need to be some determination of the relative credibility of the eyewitnesses, which I think is analogous to the passage's reference to "investigation of the authority of the texts themselves."

(And also, religious adherents aren't speaking from a place of professional authority, unlike historians, which I think also makes it a different kind of debate!)

I just really don't see why B isn't at least as analogous to the debate as E is. Can someone please shed some light on where I'm going wrong in my thought process on this?

Thank you in advance for your help!

[Misti Duvall]

I think the easiest way to distinguish between (B) and (E) is that (B) is about evaluating eyewitness accounts (ie, people relating information), where (E) is about a debate based on historical data (ie, recorded information that both sides use as supporting facts). A debate based on historical data is closer to the example in the passage, where two sides are using evidence from their respective texts to support different versions of the creation of the universe.