One approach to the question

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope13% picked this

   Any object that is posited by a scientific theory and that enhances the explanatory power of that theory

   Out of Scope: enhances explanatory power Opposite Conclusion Now that we see how answer choices are looking, they seem to be based in language about whether or not something should be deemed real. Since our author's Conclusion is saying "this approach (of designating as real all and only X's ...) is flawed", our author is trying to say "we shouldn't be designating some of that stuff as real"! She was objecting that this approach includes things (posited solely on theoretical grounds) as real that shouldn't be considered real. So we're only going to want answers that say something shouldn't be designated as real.

   13%
2. B

   Correct58% picked this

   Objects posited for theoretical reasons only should never be designated

   Why this is right

   This rule says, "if something is posited only (solely) for theoretical reasons, then it should never be designated as real". Since most scientific theories have entities posited solely on theoretical grounds, saying that anything posited by the best science theory is real would likely cause us to designate a purely theoretical thing as real. Hence, this approach seems flawed.

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

   58%
3. C

   Out of Scope8% picked this

   A scientific theory should not posit any entity that does not enhance the explanatory power

   Out of Scope: enhance power of theory Wrong Conclusion: should/shouldn't posit Again, like (A) they're talking about enhancing the power of theory, which was never brought up. We were talking about figuring out which science theory is are most explanatorily powerful one, and then designating all and only its entities as real. There's no discussion of things that do or don't increase the explanatory power of the theory. Furthermore, this rule dictates what should / shouldn't be posited by a theory. Our conversation / the author's argument is about what should / shouldn't be designated as real.

   8%
4. D

   Wrong Conclusion: should/shouldn't posit10% picked this

   A scientific theory should sometimes posit entities on grounds other than

   This rule is about what should / shouldn't be posited by a theory. Our conversation / the author's argument is about what should / shouldn't be designated as real. Our author takes no stand on what should or shouldn't be posited by scientists developing theories. He just thinks that things posited solely for theoretical reasons shouldn't be designated as real objects by humans who are considering what objects are / aren't real.

   10%
5. E

   Compatible with Approach No Impact / Opposite11% picked this

   Only objects posited by explanatorily powerful theories should be designated

   This rule says "if an object isn't posited by an explanatorily powerful theory, then it shouldn't be designated as real". This rule wouldn't conflict with the approach described, so it wouldn't help the author to argue that the approach is flawed. According to the approach, we would only designate as real objects posited by the most explanatorily powerful theory, so following that approach we wouldn't ever break this rule. In contrast, following that approach would lead us to break the rule in the correct answer (C), which is why that rule would help the author say the approach is flawed.

   11%