Reading Comprehension

PT18 · S3 · P2 · Q14 Is Science Objective

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

A recent generation of historians of science, far from portraying accepted scientific views as objectively accurate reflections of a natural world, explain the acceptance of such views in terms of the ideological biases of certain influential scientists or the institutional and rhetorical power such scientists wield.

Topic

Scientific truth's relationship to objective reality

Framework

Present Debate / Challenge a Position

Main Point

C'mon, fools. Y'all know that some scientific truths are objective facts of the world (like H20 or genetics). Sure, it's complicated and roundabout how we discover these truths (lots of mistakes along the way) and it's influenced in interesting ways by power structures and ideologies, but stop playin' like scientific truths are just subjective opinions.

Summary

P1 - Describes 2 points of view (pushes back against one)

We learn what "historians of science" mindset is -- the accepted scientific views we have aren't because they accurately describe objective reality, they're because certain scientists and organizations are influential enough to get other scientists to accept these views.

"Philosophers of science" have a related mindset -- scientific views aren't what they are because they align with objective reality, they're the result of creative scientists inventing things in their minds, with other scientists trying to falsify them.

In the final sentence, the author uses the negative attitude word "extremism", telling us that the author is against historians of science (and probably not a fan of philosophers of science).

P2 - Author sternly rebukes this crap

The author ain't having it. H20 is not the creative invention of a scientist. It's objective reality.

P3 - Author makes some friendly concessions to the historians / philosophers

Hey, philosophers, I feel you --- science takes such a circuitous path to get to the truth (with lots of mistakes and inaccuracies) that it probably feels like a bunch of random conjectures.

Hey, historians, cool stuff --- you've uncovered some interesting insights about how influence / power structures affect which truths become accepted when.

P4 - But, again, don't go runnin' 'round town speakin' that nonsense again

The author reminds these two groups of how cockamamie it is to suggest that scientific truth isn't tethered to objective reality in some crucial way, and she suggests how historians could continue doing their good stuff without venturing into this dumb stuff.

14.

In concluding the passage, the author does which one of the following?

  1. Correct

    offers a prescription

    Why this is right

    Offering a prescription = making a recommendation The author's final sentence is definitely making a recommendation, because it's telling the new historians what they should be focused on. What does a doctor's prescription sound like? "You've got a fever? You ought to take some Tylenol."

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

    82% picked this

  2. presents a paradox

    Not a Paradox

    In the first sentence of the last paragraph, the author actually resolves a paradox. He's saying you can actually believe that reality exists, and it informs scientific truth, while still appreciating the weirdly arbitrary, contingent social realities that go into how the truth gets out. But in concluding the passage (i.e. the final sentence), the author is saying what new historians ought to be doing, not presenting a paradox.

    4% picked this

  3. makes a prediction

    Not a Prediction

    A prescription/recommendation sounds like "Sheila ought to go try that sushi place on 7th." A prediction sounds like "Sheila will probably go try that sushi place on 7th."

    2% picked this

  4. concedes an argument

    Not a Concession

    Concessions are when you admit to one of your conversational opponent's potential objections. They're prefaced by keywords like While Despite the fact that Even though Although Naturally, Granted, Of course, The but the concluding sentence is not conceding anything to his opponents; it's directing his opponents towards what the author thinks would be a better field of inquiry.

    9% picked this

  5. anticipates objections

    Not a Concession

    There's barely any difference between anticipating an objection and making a concession. To make a concession is always to anticipate an objection, but I guess the converse isn't necessarily true. You could anticipate an objection, but not concede to it (not agree it's even a valid idea). But beyond being potentially redundant with (D), the author's last sentence is just bossing the historians around, telling them what they should do, not considering what objections they might have.

    2% 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