Copernicus’s astronomical system

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: sole3% picked this

   Simplicity should be the sole deciding factor in choosing among competing

   The author thinks simplicity is the deciding factor here, but only because all observational evidence was equally consistent. The compatibility between theory and observational evidence is also something the author thinks is a deciding factor. This answer accuses the author of living by the maxim, "Any time I'm choosing among competing scientific theories, I will always pick the simplest one." This is a good illustration of the difference between Strengthen + Principle (Which of the following principles, if valid, most justifies the argument) and Necessary Assumption + Principle (Which of the following principles most conforms to the argument). IF this principle were valid, it would definitely justify the conclusion, but this question stem isn't asking us that.

   3%
2. B

   Bad Evidence Match14% picked this

   If one theory is likely to be true, and another competing theory is likely to be false, then the one likely to be true

   We could stop reading at the first comma, because we can't match up the concept "one theory is likely to be true" with the evidence. Although we heard that Copernicus thought something Ptolemy believed was unlikely, that's not the same as the evidence telling us that either of the two theories was likely to be true or likely to be false.

   14%
3. C

   Weak Evidence/Conclusion Match20% picked this

   If all observational evidence is consistent with two competing theories, the one that is more intuitively true is the

   The evidence emphasizes that Copernicus's theory was "simpler", not "more intuitively true". Can we equate those? Ugh. It feels like a stretch. The conclusion is that one theory is "superior" to another, but this principle rules on whether one theory is "more practical" than another. Can we equate those? Also, seems like a stretch.

   20%
4. D

   Correct55% picked this

   Other things being equal, the more complex of two competing theories is

   Why this is right

   Hey, it's Ockham's Razor! This has the 1/2 Evidence, 1/2 Conclusion language match we seek in Principle answers. "other things being equal" at the time all observational evidence was equally consistent with both theories "the more complex" Copernicus had a simpler theory, Ptolemy had a less simple (more complex) theory "the inferior theory" Thus, Copernicus's theory was superior, Ptolemy's was inferior. If we were liking this answer but scared to pick it because we were thinking, "This principle allows me to argue that P's theory was inferior, but the actual argument was arguing that C's theory is superior", then we would just need to realize that those are completely interchangeable ideas. C's is superior to P's = P's is inferior to C's LSAT loves interchangeable rephrasings: All A's are B = No A's are not B, Not all A's are B = Some A's are not B If X, then Y = If not Y, then not X etc.

   Skill tested: Principle-Conform · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   55%
5. E

   Weaker Conclusion Match8% picked this

   Other things being equal, the simpler of two competing theories is the more

   This is just as enticing as (D), because it fits the author's evidence, which was about which theory was simpler / more complex. But this doesn't fit the author's conclusion as well as (D) did. The conclusion was about which theory was superior / inferior. This answer is acting like the conclusion was talking about which theory was more scientifically important / less scientifically important. While the concept of importance seems connected to superiority / inferiority, it doesn't hit the nail on the head the way that (D) does.

   8%