Reading Comprehension

PT108 · S1 · P4 · Q22 What is Language

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

What it means to “explain” something in science often comes down to the application of mathematics.

Passage Summary

Passage Summary Helper

Topic

The relationship between mathematical language and scientific explanation; how language shapes scientific knowledge.

Framework

Present Debate (with some Highlight Noteworthy)

Main Point

The way science “explains” the world through mathematics depends on ongoing debates about whether language (including math) truly reflects reality or is simply a matter of convention, and though many in science accept useful mathematical statements as true, it's unclear what function these statements really serve if they don't inherently correspond to the world. ( - Paragraph 2. Also see final lines of P4.)

P1: Introducing Math as Scientific Explanation

Some people think that mathematics, like language, is just a tool with internal rules, and when science "explains" something, it’s about finding accurate mathematical descriptions.

P2: The Language vs. Reality Debate

There's a big debate among linguists: does language (and by extension math in science) truly match up with real things, making knowledge solid? Or is it merely a set of conventions, making knowledge uncertain?

22.

Which one of the following statements most accurately expresses the passage's main point?

  1. Although scientists must rely on

    Wrong Emphasis

    The main clause here is that "language and math are each imperfect tools for perceiving and interpreting the physical world". The author's main point was not that "language and math both kinda suck". We want an answer that's presenting a debate about the role played by language/math in the pursuit of knowledge.

    20% picked this

  2. The acquisition of scientific knowledge

    Too Strong: depends Wrong Emphasis

    The passage never said that we can't acquire any scientific knowledge unless scientists agree to acknowledge that all mathematics is inexact. This answer also doesn't mention "language" anywhere, which is a curious omission, since language is sort of the main character of this passage.

    7% picked this

  3. If science is truly to

    Too Strong: must abandon

    The author never laid our some harsh rule that said "Progress depends on scientists abandoning new knowledge until they've conducted a systematic analysis of how the knowledge they already possess counts as 'true'. The final paragraph is definitely calling for scientists to think more about what function language performs in the acquisition of scientific knowledge, but it doesn't say to halt all other science in the meantime.

    1% picked this

  4. Correct

    In order to better understand

    Why this is right

    The strong language of "must" is a turn-off at first, but this answer ultimately is our best available and sounds a lot like the final paragraph, where our author's voice weighed in on this debate. Linguists are increasingly thinking that language is tenuous, inexact, and a matter of agreed-upon conventions. In the final paragraph, the author is saying, "Linguists have reached the point at which they must ask: what do words/sentences tell us about the world." And then she says, "In science and math, then, it would seem equally necessary to ask, what function does language perform in the acquisition of scientific knowledge?" If E = mc2 doesn't correspond essentially to the physical world, then what relationship does it have?

    Skill tested: Main Point · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    71% picked this

  5. Without the debates among linguists

    Wrong Emphasis Unsupported Causal Relationship

    This answer is basically saying, "We all owe a debt of gratitude linguists. Without them, scientists would not have begun exploring the role of math in the acquisition of scientific knowledge". The passage never indicates any causal relationship between linguists debating the role of language and scientists exploring the role of math. In fact, the final sentence of the passage makes it seem like scientists haven't really begun to explore this yet. The author is presenting the debate among linguists and suggesting to science, "Pssst -- hey, maybe y'all should have this conversation too."

    1% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free