Popular science publications that explain

Answer choices

1. A

   Opposite (if anything)1% picked this

   Science publications should balance the use of metaphors with more

   We need an answer that says we should go towards the rigorous, accurate direction and away from the metaphorical, inaccurate direction. So "balancing them" feels almost like the opposite of what we want.

   1%
2. B

   No Distinction4% picked this

   The more recent a scientific development is, the harder it is to explain it accurately

   We need an answer that says we should go towards the rigorous, accurate direction and away from the metaphorical, inaccurate direction. This doesn't offer us any distinction between those two options. It just says "newer = harder". We know. That was basically a background premise. But how should we deal with these harder / newer developments? The rigorous/accurate way or the metaphorical/popular way?

   4%
3. C

   Correct90% picked this

   In reporting scientific developments, it is better to fail to reach a wide audience than

   Why this is right

   We need an answer that says we should go towards the rigorous, accurate direction and away from the metaphorical, inaccurate direction. This tips the scales in that direction. The author was Weighing Tradeoffs and her conclusion indicates that she would rather avoid being inaccurate than seek a wide audience.

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

   90%
4. D

   Opposite4% picked this

   In reporting scientific developments, it is better to reach a wide audience than

   We need an answer that says we should go towards the rigorous, accurate direction and away from the metaphorical, inaccurate direction. This is saying we should go towards the metaphorical direction that reaches a wide audience.

   4%
5. E

   Too Weak0% picked this

   Even the most rigorous explanations of some scientific concepts must still

   Too Weak: even the most have some This answer is saying that you'll never 100% get rid of metaphors. Okay, cool. But the question is still whether we should aspire to the 99% metaphor free rigorous style (that is accurate but small audience) or whether we should aspire to the highly metaphorical style that is less accurate but attracts a wider audience. This doesn't help us pick.

   0%