Logical Reasoning

PT123 · S2 · Q18 Modern science is built on the process

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning 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

Modern science is built on the process of posing hypotheses and testing them against observations—in essence, attempting to show that the hypotheses are incorrect.

Facts

causal (brings more)

Overthrowing conventional wisdom >> max recognition

causal (accordingly)

Some scientists are skeptical of the conventional wisdom of global warming.

(inference: those scientists are hoping to overthrow conventional global warming wisdom and thereby attain max recognition?)

pivot (instead remarkable)

Even though hundreds of researchers are trying to make breakthroughs in climatology, there's very little evidence against global warming.

Evaluate

If we were trying to put all these facts together (which isn't specifically our job, but when possible still a good idea), it sounds like the author is suggesting that global warming is probably a correct theory.

The goal of science is to show a hypothesis is incorrect. The global warming hypothesis is widely accepted / conventional wisdom. If you could show that hypothesis was incorrect, then you'd get tons of recognition. And hundreds of scientists are working on this topic, but you don't see much counterevidence against global warming.

Goal

If lots of scientists are trying to falsify global warming and can't, then that probably means that global warming is legit. That might be what the correct answer is getting at, but let's look for the most provable answer.

18.

The information above provides the most support for which one of the following statements?

  1. Most scientists who are reluctant

    Unsupported

    The passage doesn't suggest skeptics are violating the standards of scientific debate. In fact, the author calls the existence of skeptics "unsurprising" given the prestige attached to overturning conventional wisdom, i.e., normal scientific behavior. The essence of science is to work toward falsifying hypotheses, so being reluctant to accept a hypothesis seems on brand.

    6% picked this

  2. Correct

    Most researchers in climatology have

    Why this is right

    Nothing brings more recognition than overturning conventional wisdom., and the global warming hypothesis (being widely accepted), is conventional wisdom. So discrediting the global warming hypothesis would bring max recognition. Do we think most researchers are motivated by getting recognition? The passage doesn't say so, but it feels like a reasonable assumption that in any profession, most people would like to be recognized for their work. Recognition, here, doesn't mean fame (c'mon, they're scientists, how famous can they get?) It would just mean being respected / celebrated by your peers. Most of us desire that.

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

    57% picked this

  3. There is evidence that conclusively

    Too Strong

    The passage notes that few researchers find evidence against global warming, but it does not claim this conclusively shows global warming is true. An absence of disconfirming evidence is suggestive, but not conclusive.

    10% picked this

  4. Scientists who are skeptical about

    Unsupported

    The passage says nothing about whether skeptics have offered alternative hypotheses. It only says some skeptics exist. Whether or not they have alternatives is unaddressed.

    21% picked this

  5. Research in global warming is

    Too Strong

    The passage says recognition motivates researchers in general, but does not claim that recognition is the primary driver of global warming research. There could be many motivations: public health concern, intellectual curiosity, funding, career advancement of various kinds. "Primarily driven by" is a stronger claim than the passage supports. The correct answer is safer because it stays vague. Something could be a substantial motive without being the #1 motive.

    6% 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