Many major scientific discoveries of

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct70% picked this

   Only findings that an investigator purposely seeks can directly bear on

   Why this is right

   Since this is conditional, our default response is to just look at the reasoning move and ask whether our author did such a thing. This is saying, "If a finding directly bears on the research, then it is a finding the investigator purposely seeks". The argument established that based on how grants work, investigators will only be looking at stuff that directly bears on their research (they'll ignore anything else). Because they're only looking at stuff that directly bears, the author thinks they won't make serendipitous discoveries (which were defined as findings that are not purposely sought). So, yes, this does match the reasoning move from, "If they only look at what directly bears, then there will be no serendipitous discovery", because it's saying "the stuff that directly bears will be stuff the investigator purposely sought (not accidental stuff discovered along the way)". Negating conditional ideas is not a great tactic for most students, but if we did, we'd be saying "Hey, sometimes findings that weren't purposely sought can still directly bear on the research", which opens up the door to the idea that serendipity could still happen even if you're restricted to only looking at stuff that directly bears on the research.

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

   70%
2. B

   Out of Scope: the past11% picked this

   In the past few scientific investigators attempted to make clear predictions of the outcome

   This argument is only what's possible under present circumstances. What happened in the past is irrelevant.

   11%
3. C

   Out of Scope: personally prefer9% picked this

   Dependence on large grants is preventing investigators from conducting the type of scientific research that those

   (C) touches on investigators' personal preferences, but this argument doesn't address whether research is aligned with personal preferences. It's only about whether research would have the freedom to pursue serendipitous discoveries made along the way.

   9%
4. D

   Too Strong: All8% picked this

   All scientific investigators who provide grant sponsors with clear projections of the outcome of their research receive at least some of the

   The argument doesn't care if 100% vs. 99% vs. 20% of clearly stated grant proposals get funding. This is a very extreme idea, and there's no reason the author needs to believe that every single scientist with a good grant proposal gets at least some money.

   8%
5. E

   Too Strong: the most valuable2% picked this

   In general the most valuable scientific discoveries are the product

   Nothing in the argument is using comparative language to rank the value of discoveries.

   2%