Ideally, scientific laws should display

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct53% picked this

   All else being equal, a precise, general scientific law is to be preferred over one

   Why this is right

   Wow, a rare breed of correct answer that derives its support from only one claim. This answer is just supported by the very first sentence. Since ideal scientific laws should display precision and generality, we can say "all else being equal, a precise, general scientific law is the best." Something that achieves an ideal is to be preferred over something that does not achieve an ideal.

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

   53%
2. B

   Too Strong3% picked this

   The social sciences would benefit if they redirected their focus to the subject matter of

   There's no wording in this answer that is particularly strong, but the suggestion for social sciences such as Sociology to stop focusing on nebulous things like class and power and start focusing on precise things like covalent bonds or gravity is kind of silly. At that point, Sociology would cease doing sociology and would just be doing chemistry or physics. It's okay that sociology (and other social sciences) aren't ideal. The author can just be descriptively acknowledging that without implying that we should get rid of these less-than-ideal social science fields altogether.

   3%
3. C

   Out of Scope: should6% picked this

   Terms such as "class" should be more precisely formulated by

   The paragraph provides wording that almost seems like counter-support for this. The author is acknowledging the necessarily imprecise subject matter of social scientists: because of the nature of their subject matter, laws of social science often have to use imprecise terms. So this paragraph doesn't support the idea that they should do something impossible.

   6%
4. D

   Out of Scope: should4% picked this

   Social scientists should make an effort to construct more laws that apply

   This is essentially the same answer as (B). The paragraph described how social science was less than ideal because it can't really attain the precision or generality we'd wish for. But the author isn't lamenting this and saying we should change it. She's just describing it. If she were really saying that these are things we should fix about social science, then we'd have to no way to pick between "fix precision" in (C) vs. "fix generality" in (D).

   4%
5. E

   Too Strong: invariably35% picked this

   The laws of social science are invariably not

   Called it! I knew they'd go overboard and say, "See? Social science isn't a real science". Beyond the fact that we shouldn't think "less-than-ideal scientific laws" means the same thing as "not truly scientific", there were quantifiers that in the 2nd and 3rd sentences: often have to be imprecise typically can only be generalized to certain systems So we definitely can't support the idea that social science laws are invariably not scientific.

   35%