PrepTest 145

Topic: Science

Paragraph 1

• Paragraph note
  • A function is discussed and applied to a human activity
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
  • Function of language - Change what others know/believe/want
  • Humans - Respond to mental state of others

Paragraph 2

• Paragraph note
  • Animal language and purpose contrasted with humans
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
  • Animals - Communication inadvertent, because aren’t aware of others’ mental states (exception - maybe chimps)
  • Example 1 - Frogs - Mating call, but not because they think of other frogs’ thoughts
  • Example 2 - Primates/Chimps - Don’t respond differently when others do and don’t share info
  • Not as goal-oriented as they appear

Paragraph 1

• Paragraph note
  • A common view reflecting a distinction is presented
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
  • Animal communication - Rigid response to stimuli
  • Human communication - Spontaneous and creative

Paragraph 2

• Paragraph note
  • This view is explored, with 2 experts cited
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
  • Common belief - Animals can’t lie (intend to deceive)
  • Expert 1 - Grice - To mean X, must want others to believe X
  • Common belief - Conscious intent is uniquely human
  • Expert 2 /Example - Maritain - Bees dancing is just reflect

Paragraph 3

• Paragraph note
  • Author attacks this view (Reasoning/Assumptions)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
  • Author - View is circular - assumes animals don’t have intent, then uses lack of intent to show comms are different since they lack intent
  • Recent research (Chimps and others) - Questions assumption that animals lack intent

Main Points:

Passage A - While animal communication might appear intentional, it’s actually different from human communication in that it isn’t intentional and doesn’t attempt to alter the beliefs and behavior of other animals.

Passage B - Despite a common belief that animal communication is a rigid response to stimuli and lacks conscious intent, recent research suggests that there isn’t much difference between animal and human communication.

Passage A:

• Lines 1-5 - A key function of language is noted; it’s applied to humans
• Lines 6-11 - Animal communication is contrasted with human
• Line 11 - An example is introduced
• Line 20 - Another example is introduced
• Line 25 - Another example is introduced

Passage B:

• Lines 30-33 - A common belief about a distinction is noted
• Lines 34-35 - An implication of that belief is listed
• Line 39 - An expert is introduced
• Lines 43-45 - Another common belief is noted
• Line 45 - Another expert is introduced
• Line 58 - The Author highlights a flaw in the common belief
• Lines 59-65 - The Author cites recent research to call assumptions of the common belief into question

Phenomenon/Explanation - Both passages deal with the same phenomenon - animal communication. Passage A argues that it’s “not as purposeful” as it first appears (Line 29) since animals can’t “attribute mental states to others” (Line 11) as humans can. Passage B, on the other hand, argues that this view is “circular” (Line 53), assuming that animals lack conscious intention (Lines 53-54) to prove that they can’t consciously intend their communication. So the two passages deal with the same topic, but they reach opposed conclusions over it.

Examples - Both passages bring up certain animals as examples of the point they’re trying to prove. Passage A talks about frogs (Line 12), primates/macaques (Line 18; Line 20), and chimps (Line 25); Passage B talks about bees (Line 46) and chimpos (Line 59). In both cases, the examples are used to make smaller points that build to the overall argument - neither passage is about the examples.

Relationship - Interestingly, the Author of Passage B brings up experts with whom she disagrees - but ones that largely agree with the argument put forward in Passage A. Passage A’s Author argues that animals aren’t “goal-directed” with their communications (Line 29). And the scientists and experts in Passage B before the pivot argue that animal communications aren’t intentional, but rather conditioned reflexes (Line 51).

There’s a lot of discussion of the philosophy of mind here, so we should expect the questions to be difficult in that regard. Let’s be sure to check the answers against the passages to make sure we’re not falling for any traps.