Reading Comprehension

PT115 · S1 · P4 · Q23 Theory of the Mind

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

Some of the philosophers find the traditional, subjective approach to studying the mind outdated and ineffectual.

Topic

The debate between subjective and objective approaches to studying the mind.

Framework

Present Debate

Main Point

Philosophers clash over whether to study the mind through subjective introspection or objective scientific methods, but genuine progress in the debate will require evaluating the authority and limitations of both perspectives—possibly leading to new ways of understanding the mind. The Most Valuable Sentence is at the end of the final paragraph:

P1: Introduction to Objectivist View

A group of philosophers think the old approach of describing inner feelings (like pain or anger) is outdated; they argue scientific, externally observable data is far more reliable and effective for understanding the mind, just as it is for other sciences.

P2: The Subjectivist Rebuttal

Subjectivist philosophers push back, arguing that knowledge must include subjective experience and introspection, and question why only objective data should "count."

P3: Lack of Common Ground

The passage suggests these two approaches can't easily reconcile, and the main problem is that the sides don't share enough foundational beliefs to make productive dialogue possible.

23.

The author's primary purpose in writing the passage is to

  1. suggest that there might be

    Too Narrow

    The author would probably agree that there might be valid aspects to both approaches to studying the mind, but is that why she wrote this passage? This definitely feel like it's happening in the final paragraph. By asking questions about the authority of these two perspectives, the author suggests that each of them might have a valid point of view in certain cases. But this answer seems to only touch on that final paragraph. This answer doesn't really wrap its arms around any of the other paragraphs.

    9% picked this

  2. Correct

    advocate a possible solution to

    Why this is right

    This encompasses more of the passage than (A) did, and it resonates with our Problem / Solution framework. The first two paragraphs lay out the debate between subjectivists and objectivists. The 3rd paragraph zooms in on the Problem, the impasse: - on the face, it seems unlikely these two can be reconciled - But what is particularly distressing about the debate - they lack a common context in which to consider each other's perspectives The 4th paragraph uses an analogy to flesh out the impasse. The 5th paragraph is where the author starts advocating a possible solution: - What would be required to resolve the debate, then is an investigation into the authority of their differing perspectives.

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

    87% picked this

  3. criticize subjectivist philosophers for failing

    Out of Scope: criticize subjectivists

    This author had no specific gripe with subjectivists. The author doesn't really pick a side in this debate. She just says, "It sucks you guys aren't even communicating. What if you enlist some epistemologists and investigate the authority of your differing perspectives?"

    0% picked this

  4. defend the subjective approach to

    Out of Scope: defend subjectivists

    This author had no specific gripe with objectivists. The author doesn't really pick a side in this debate. She's neither defending nor attacking either side. She just says, "It sucks you guys aren't even communicating. What if you enlist some epistemologists and investigate the authority of your differing perspectives?"

    0% picked this

  5. evaluate the legitimacy of differing

    Out of Scope: evaluate legitimacy

    In the final paragraph the author calls for others to evaluate the legitimacy of differing conceptions of evidence, but she doesn't do so herself.

    4% 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