Clarissa: The natural sciences would

Answer choices

1. A

   No Support Person 216% picked this

   mathematics has been a highly significant factor in the advance of

   Myungsook didn't really have any response to Clarissa's first claim. We don't know how M feels about math's role in scientific progress.

   16%
2. B

   No Support Person 12% picked this

   converting observations into quantitative terms is

   Clarissa never discussed how easy / difficult it is to convert something to precise quantitative terms.

   2%
3. C

   No Support from Either9% picked this

   not all observations can be stated precisely in

   We couldn't derive from either paragraph the notion that "some observations cannot be stated precisely in quantitative terms".

   9%
4. D

   Correct67% picked this

   successfully doing natural science demands careful consideration of observations not stated precisely

   Why this is right

   This answer is brutal, so it's a real "process of elimination / find the closest thing to what we were looking for" type of situation. M would agree with this claim. M thinks that you can only convert observations to numbers once you've thoroughly explored the observations themselves. In other words, doing science demands/requires carefully considering observations before you've stated them precisely in quantitative terms. C would disagree with this claim, since C says "until you state an observation in precise quantitative terms, no observation is even worthy of serious attention". To simplify, they're arguing over which comes first "serious, thorough exploration of an observation" or "converting that observation into math". C is saying, "You can't even get started with exploring an observation until it's in math terms." M is saying, "You can't put something in math terms, until you've carefully considered the observation." The context of the conversation is the progress of natural science, which is how "successfully doing natural science" gets shoehorned into this answer choice.

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

   67%
5. E

   No Support from Either6% picked this

   useful scientific theories require the application

   We couldn't derive from either person that "if you don't apply mathematics, no scientific theory can be useful". Clarissa thinks, "if we didn't have math, science would not have made such progress", but that's not as strong as "no scientific theory would be useful". Furthermore, nothing M says would support the disagree position that "sometime you have useful scientific theories without any application of math".

   6%