Reading Comprehension

PT111 · S2 · P3 · Q15 Biology and Universal Laws

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

Philosophers of science have long been uneasy with biology, preferring instead to focus on physics.

Topic

Whether biology consists of universal laws (like physics) or whether historical contingency is integral to it.

Framework

Present Debate. The author lays out the longstanding preference for physics, traces how some biologists tried to imitate physics, and presents a recent challenge — that biology may need to make room for historical contingency.

Main Point

Philosophers of science have favored physics because it deals in universal laws and avoids the merely particular; some biologists have tried to make biology look like physics, but recent biologists question whether biology is reducible to universal laws — historical contingency may be integral.

P1: Why philosophers prefer physics

Philosophers of science distrust uncertainty and want repeatable, universal phenomena, not historically contingent ones. They're fascinated by elephants and mice falling at the same rate (universal law) but uninterested in how elephants and mice came to be different sizes (historical particulars).

P2: Some biologists tried to be like physicists

Some evolutionary biologists also tried to construct biology as a set of universal laws — invoking a universal "struggle for existence" or claiming DNA evolves at a constant rate. Recently, however, some biologists have questioned this and raised the possibility that historical contingency is integral to biology.

P3: A test contrast — "all planets move in ellipses"

"All planets move in ellipses" is genuinely universal: it applies even to merely possible planets, because the shape of orbits follows necessarily from the laws of gravity.

15.

Which one of the following best summarizes the main idea of the passage?

  1. Just as philosophers of science

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope: shy away from philosophy The passage never once talked about biologists being reluctant to confront philosophical questions.

    6% picked this

  2. Correct

    While science is often considered

    Why this is right

    The main clause is, "the degree to which [biology] can be understood as arising from [universal] laws is currently in dispute". That looks super appealing, given our Present Debate framework. It's correctly identifying the central issue being debated by Determinist Biologists vs. Nondeterminist Biologists: can biology really be expressed in universal laws? The opening clause here seems like a nod to the somewhat extraneous discussion in the first paragraph, which emphasizes the traditional bias of philosophers of science that science should be the study of what is true everywhere and for all times (i.e. universal laws).

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

    76% picked this

  3. Although biologists have long believed

    Wrong Emphasis Opposite, if anything

    The main clause here is "some biologists have recently begun to emulate the methods of physicists". Since we're trying to match the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph, we'd want the main point to sound like, "some biologists have recently begun to question whether biology can really be expressed in universal laws (the way that physics is)." Since these recent biologists are pessimistic that biology can be expressed in universal laws, they are definitely not trying to emulate the methods of physicists.

    15% picked this

  4. Whereas physicists have achieved a

    Wrong Emphasis

    The main clause here is "physics and biology employ similar theoretical approaches". That is nowhere close to what we want, which is "determinist and nondeterminist biologists are debating whether biology can really consist of universal laws".

    1% picked this

  5. Since many biologists are uncomfortable

    Wrong Emphasis

    The main clause here is "there has been little interaction between biology and philosophy of science". That is nowhere close to what we want, which is "determinist and nondeterminist biologists are debating whether biology can really consist of universal laws". The fact that determinist biologists are allied with philosophers of science in this debate also sort of works against what this answer choice is actually saying.

    2% 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