The mathematics of the scientific

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct73% picked this

   If computerized models based on a theory behave like their real-world counterparts behave, then that

   Why this is right

   This looks pretty stellar. Is the trigger applicable to complexity theory? Do computerized models based on complexity theory behave like their real-world counterparts behave? Yes, that's what the final sentence of the paragraph tells us. Okay, then according to this rule, "Complexity theory is probably correct". Does that help us justify the conclusion that "there is good evidence that complexity is correct"? Yeah, that sounds pretty close to the conclusion. It doesn't need to be identical to do a good job strengthening it.

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

   73%
2. B

   Reversed Logic18% picked this

   If a scientific theory is correct, then computerized mathematical models based on that theory behave

   This has similar ideas to (A), but they're in the wrong order. When we're trying to match a Principle to an Argument, we need the Trigger (left side) to match up with the evidence and the Outcome (right side) to match up with the conclusion. This answer is saying, "If conclusion, then premise".

   18%
3. C

   Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

   If actual phenomena can be pictured as computerized models, computers themselves will eventually discover the mathematics of the

   This rule would help support a conclusion that "computers will eventually discover the math of the correct theory". We're trying to support a conclusion that says "there is good evidence that complexity is correct", so this outcome doesn't match our conclusion at all.

   1%
4. D

   Bad Conclusion Match7% picked this

   If they evolve exactly like real-world phenomena, computer models are neither purely stable nor purely chaotic, which

   This rule would help support a conclusion that "computers are nearly purely stable nor purely chaotic". We're trying to support a conclusion that says "there is good evidence that complexity is correct", so this outcome doesn't match our conclusion at all. The trigger is also not going to match, because we were told that the computer model was evolving much like the real-world phenomena, not exactly like them.

   7%
5. E

   Bad Conclusion Match0% picked this

   If computers verify that there are mathematical errors in the calculations of scientists, then the theories of those

   This rule would help support a conclusion that "this theory is probably incorrect". We're trying to support a conclusion that says "there is good evidence that complexity is correct", so this outcome is going the opposite way of what we're trying to prove.

   0%