Reading comp PrepTest 142 · Section 3 · Question 21
Passage
Questions 17-21 Passage A . To a neuroscientist, you are your brain; nothing . causes your behavior other than the
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Science
Passage A
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Passage A - Since neuroscience shows us that rational people aren't always in control of their behavior, the justice system should focus on deterrence rather than retribution.
Passage B - According to Ayer (and Hume), free will and determinism can coexist, as a free action can be determined by internal sources, while external causes result in non-free/constrained actions.
Key Lines:
Passage A:
Lines 3-5 - The overall topic is previewed
Lines 6-9 - A problem with the legal system is highlighted
Lines 15-16 - A recommendation away from something is made
Lines 19-20 - A recommendation on what to replace that thing with is made
Passage B:
Lines 29-31 - The paradoxical main argument is described
LInes 32-36 - The argument is attributed and stated
Lines 36-37 - A distinction is made within that argument
Lines 37-38 - The first part of the distinction is defined
Lines 39-40 - The second part of the distinction is defined
Lines 49-52 - The argument is stated with the distinction in mind
Lines 53-56 - The Author uses an analogy to relate it to the paradox
Meta-Structure - Relationship Between Passages:
Problem/Recommendation - In Passage A, the Author presents a problem with the legal system due to developments in neuroscience (Lines 4-5). She then makes a recommendation as to a shift in focus based on this problem (Line 16; Lines 19-20).
Paradox - Passage B introduces a paradoxical view: Free will (people make their own decisions) and determinism (people's decisions are determined for them) can coexist (Lines 29-31). From there, he discusses the philosophers who argued for this (Lines 32-34), eventually resolving it by defining concepts in specific ways—free actions are determined by internal sources, which include the brain and brain chemistry (Lines 37-38). Thus, some decisions that are determined are also free (Lines 54-56).
Both passages discuss neuroscience, brain chemistry, and decision-making/free will. They both accept that some decisions at least could be determined by the brain chemistry. However, there is a slight difference in what they believe that means. Passage A's Author is willing to say that these actions aren't freely chosen and thus they shouldn't face retribution. Passage B presents an argument from philosophers that believe these actions—in a disease-free brain—are free.
Last Thoughts:
Passage A's Author is much more involved in the passage than B. In Passage A, the Author ends up making some recommendations ("should"). In Passage B, the Author filters the argument through Ayer/Hume. We should keep that in mind as we analyze answer choices.
Passage A
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- Scientific findings are discussed, along with what they should mean for the legal system
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Neuroscience - Your brain's working cause your behavior
- Law assumption - Only rationality matters
- Implications for law - People aren't necessarily in control of their actions
- Recommendation - Shift justice system from retribution to deterring future harm (possibly decreasing punishment)
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- An argument that seemingly contradictory views can both be true is introduced
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Determinism (neuroscience) - The physical brain determines actions
- Free will - People choose their action
- Long-been argued - Free will and determinism can both be true
- Paragraph note
- The compromise view is introduced, and a distinction is made
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Ayer/Hume - Soft determinism
- Free vs. Constrained actions
- Free - Caused by internal (own will; exception - mental illness) - Did A, could have done B
- Constrained - Caused by external (examples - hypnosis and mental disorders) - Did A, couldn't have done anything else
- Paragraph note
- The compromise view is clarified
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Ayer - Actions are free if they're not constrained/source of cause matters
- Ayer - Doesn't discuss brain, but it's internal, so an action could be free but determined by it
Passage A - Since neuroscience shows us that rational people aren't always in control of their behavior, the justice system should focus on deterrence rather than retribution.
Passage B - According to Ayer (and Hume), free will and determinism can coexist, as a free action can be determined by internal sources, while external causes result in non-free/constrained actions.
Key Lines:
Passage A:
Lines 3-5 - The overall topic is previewed
Lines 6-9 - A problem with the legal system is highlighted
Lines 15-16 - A recommendation away from something is made
Lines 19-20 - A recommendation on what to replace that thing with is made
Passage B:
Lines 29-31 - The paradoxical main argument is described
LInes 32-36 - The argument is attributed and stated
Lines 36-37 - A distinction is made within that argument
Lines 37-38 - The first part of the distinction is defined
Lines 39-40 - The second part of the distinction is defined
Lines 49-52 - The argument is stated with the distinction in mind
Lines 53-56 - The Author uses an analogy to relate it to the paradox
Meta-Structure - Relationship Between Passages:
Problem/Recommendation - In Passage A, the Author presents a problem with the legal system due to developments in neuroscience (Lines 4-5). She then makes a recommendation as to a shift in focus based on this problem (Line 16; Lines 19-20).
Paradox - Passage B introduces a paradoxical view: Free will (people make their own decisions) and determinism (people's decisions are determined for them) can coexist (Lines 29-31). From there, he discusses the philosophers who argued for this (Lines 32-34), eventually resolving it by defining concepts in specific ways—free actions are determined by internal sources, which include the brain and brain chemistry (Lines 37-38). Thus, some decisions that are determined are also free (Lines 54-56).
Both passages discuss neuroscience, brain chemistry, and decision-making/free will. They both accept that some decisions at least could be determined by the brain chemistry. However, there is a slight difference in what they believe that means. Passage A's Author is willing to say that these actions aren't freely chosen and thus they shouldn't face retribution. Passage B presents an argument from philosophers that believe these actions—in a disease-free brain—are free.
Last Thoughts:
Passage A's Author is much more involved in the passage than B. In Passage A, the Author ends up making some recommendations ("should"). In Passage B, the Author filters the argument through Ayer/Hume. We should keep that in mind as we analyze answer choices.
Question prompt
Which one of the
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: C
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Science
Answer choices
-
AMany word processors are Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. This answer doesn't bring up a baseline assumption of word processors, and it doesn't explicitly recommend a change, so it's incorrect. -
BEconomic models generally presume Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. This answer brings up a baseline assumption in a field (economics/models) and then establishes that studies show it to be wrong. However, it doesn't make a recommendation to change, just a prediction that the models will be wrong, so it's incorrect. -
CThe existing program for Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C matches the stem
Correct. Question Type:
Parallel Reasoning
Strategy Overview:
Outline the argument made in Passage A and then turn it into an abstraction that can be used to analyze the answer choices
Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
Passage A started by bringing up neuroscience (Lines 1-3) before pivoting to the implications it has for the law (Lines 3-5). It shows what the baseline assumption of the law is (rationality is the only thing that matters—Lines 5-6) before arguing that neuroscience proves that isn't the case (Lines 6-9). Then, it makes a recommendation for a change (from retribution/Line 16 to deterrence/Line 20) based on this implication.
So we should look for an answer that similarly brings up that the baseline assumption of a field is wrong and thus a change should be made.
Answer Explanation:
This answer brings up the baseline assumption in teaching math that is wrong, and it then recommends that a change should be made. This answer has all the relevant elements of Passage A, so it's the correct answer.
Key Takeaway:
Those elements that we identify as relevant when working through a Parallel Reasoning question in RC? Those are the same elements we should identify in RC. -
DCivil disobedience is justified Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. This answer establishes criteria for something to be justified—it doesn't establish a baseline assumption of an argument that it shows to be wrong. Nor does it recommend change. It has no elements from the passage! -
EBeing autonomous does not Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. First, this answer is suspect because its topic is pretty close to the topic of Passage A, and that's usually a sign of a wrong answer in Parallel Reasoning questions. Additionally, here, the statement that something is wrong (the first sentence) serves as the conclusion. It does this by drawing a distinction, which is actually closer to what Passage B did!
What this tests
Question analytics
Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.
Answer choice distribution
Accounts
Save your place across PrepTests
Bookmark questions, build weak-spot lists, and pick up exactly where you left off—built for serious repeat practice.
No payment yet. We will only email when accounts open.
Already have an account? Log in
Deeper help
Ask follow-ups on any step
Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.
Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.
Discussion
-
Typos 3 replies
Started by Tucker-Sutlive
-
Please Explain 1 reply
Started by rmkrutz@crimson.ua.edu