Reading comp PrepTest 108 · Section 1 · Question 25

Topic: Science

Paragraph 1

• Paragraph note
  • Some thinkers on scientific explanation (math is a language that can describe the physical world)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • "Some thinkers'" view:
    • Math is a language that you use to describe some aspect of the physical world (second and third sentences)
    • The language is evaluated by how coherent it is and how well it describes reality (second sentence)
  • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to "some thinkers":
    • Applying math to the physical world causes the creation of a statement about the world (third sentence)

Paragraph 2

• Paragraph note
  • A similar debate in linguistics (is language solid or just arbitrary conventions?)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Comparisons, according to the author:
    • The questions about scientific knowledge in paragraph 1 are similar to linguists' debate on the relationship between language and reality (second sentence)
    • The two sides of the linguists' debate differ over whether language refers to reality in an essential, dependable way or is just a matter of agreed-upon conventions that can change over time (last sentence)
  • Author's attitude: "at the center of the issue" (first sentence), "can thus be found" (first sentence)

Paragraph 3

• Paragraph note
  • Expanding on one side of linguists' debate (statements are only true if there aren't better alternatives) and applying it to the sciences
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Views of linguists who think language is just arbitrary conventions:
    • Gaining more popularity (first sentence)
    • Language is dependent on the practices and theories of those who use it (second sentence)
    • A statement is only true when there are no promising alternatives (third sentence)
  • Comparison, according to the author:
    • The linguists' views are applicable to the sciences because some say mathematical statements are similarly arbitrary and are only "true" until a better statement can take its place (fourth through last sentences)
  • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to the author:
    • The scientific community accepting a mathematical statement causes the "analogy/metaphor" math provides to be held true (last sentence)
  • Author's attitude: "wider acceptance" (first sentence), "Certainly this characterization would seem to be applicable" (fourth sentence)

Paragraph 4

• Paragraph note
  • Author on the question sciences must ask (what do mathematical models actually provide in gaining knowledge?)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Comparison, according to the author:
    • In the course of their debate, linguists have encountered an important question: if language is truly arbitrary, what is its role in the pursuit of knowledge? (first sentence)
    • The sciences have not yet applied this question to their field, but they should (second and last sentences)
  • Author's attitude: "they must ask" (first sentence), "equaly necessary to ask" (second sentence), "yet to be significantly addressed" (third sentence)

Main Point: Scientists should look to the debate amongst linguists about the relationship between language and reality to understand the nature of mathematics and its correspondence with reality.

Paragraph 2, Sentence 1 (P2, S1): The question is posed (what is the relationship between scientific language and reality?)

P4, S1: The author's directive

Question/Answer: This passage utilizes a Question/Answer Meta-Structure. In such a structure, the author describes a question and (sometimes) an answer.

The first paragraph of this particular passage sets the stage, introducing us to the link between language, math, and the physical world. According to some, math (like language) can be thought of as an artificial system that sets out to describe how the world works. Then, the second paragraph describes a question at the center of scientific knowledge: what is the nature of the relationship between mathematical language and the reality it seeks to describe. The author relates this issue to a debate happening in linguistics about whether language is completely arbitrary or if it corresponds to reality in some essential way.

In the third paragraph, the author explains the former position (that holds language is arbitrary) and applies it to the question in the scientific community, demonstrating how it aligns with how some people utilize mathematical statements. In the fourth and final paragraph, the author points out an important question that linguists have arrived at: if language is truly arbitrary, what is its role in the pursuit of knowledge? The author thinks that scientists need to apply this question to their own field.

The Question/Answer Meta-Structure is ultimately the best fit because the "the issue of scientific knowledge can thus be found questions about the relationship between language and what it refers to" (P2, S1) is the "question" that the passage addresses. Now, the author's answer to this question is more difficult to identify. While the author never lands on a concrete answer, they indicate a direction of thought that could be helpful: scientists should approach the question as linguists do. The author thinks this connection is important, but they do not say that it's enough to resolve the debate. Since the author focuses on the application of the linguists' debate, we should include it in our main point.

In passages that utilize a Question/Answer Meta-Structure, the main point will generally be the author's opinion on possible answers to the question. As we just determined, this author doesn't settle on a concrete answer but rather indicates a way to approach the question. Therefore, we can anticipate a main point that says something like this: "Scientists should look to the debate amongst linguists about the relationship between language and reality to understand the nature of mathematics and its correspondence with reality."

Comparison: The most prominent minor Meta-Structure in this passage is the comparison. One could even argue that this so-called "minor" Meta-Structure is even more important than its "major" counterpart. The entire passage hinges on the author's comparison of science and linguistics. The author argues that both fields ask similar questions about the relationship between language and reality. When a passage hinges on a comparison between two things, we can expect the author to describe many supporting comparisons along the way. We've catalogued these comparisons in the Passage Summary above, and we can expect at least one of them to figure into a question.

As difficult as this passage is (and, make no mistake, it’s a doozy), the author at least does us the courtesy of summarizing the main point in the last paragraph of the passage. The last three sentences of this passage are the main point, and they should be our lodestar as we work through these difficult questions.