PrepTest 156

[lcid:3722] Prep Test 156 LSAT — Reading Comp — S3 Reading comp

Passage

Passage A is adapted from a book review by physicist Freeman Dyson. Passage B is adapted from a response to Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Science


Passage A

Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Reductionist (science can explain everything) and traditional (science is only one source of knowledge) extremes and Dyson's position (near traditional)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author’s attitude
    • List of two extremes concerning the role of science in human understanding, according to Dyson:
      • Reductionist: all knowledge can be explained by science (second sentence)
      • Traditional: science is only one source of knowledge (third sentence)
    • Comparison, according to the Dyson:
      • While skeptics of paranormal phenomena are near the reductionist extreme, Dyson is near the traditional extreme (last sentence)
    • Dyson's attitude: "extreme" (first sentence); "reductionist" (second sentence); "I am near the traditional extreme" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Dyson on the connection between science's limits and paranormal phenomena's existence (science hasn't proven existence, but it can plausibly exist beyond scientific investigation)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author’s attitude
    • Dyson's view:
      • Even though science hasn't been able to study extrasensory perception and telepathy — and reductionists have concluded that they do not exist — these paranormal phenomena may exist beyond the scope of scientific investigation (first through last sentences)
    • Dyson's attitude: "closely connected" (first sentence); "failed" (second sentence); "I do not accept this conclusion" (fourth sentence); "may exist" (fifth sentence); "just a hypothesis, but one that I find tenable and plausible" (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Dyson on evidence of paranormal phenomena (abundant, anecdotal, show phenomena may be observable only under stress)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author’s attitude
    • Dyson's view:
      • There is abundant anecdotal but carefully documented evidence of people who possess paranormal abilities that suggests that paranormal phenomena are only observable under stress and strong emotion (first through fourth sentence)
    • Comparison, according to Dyson:
      • The evidence that people possess paranormal abilities is anecdotal, unlike scientific evidence that can be repeated under controlled environments — the possibility that phenomena are only observable under stress/emotion make evidence impossible to reproduce in a scientific setting (second, fifth, and last sentences)
    • Dyson's attitude: "abundant evidence" (first sentence); "carefully documented" (third sentence); "make it clear" (fourth sentence); "occur only when people are under stress and experiencing strong emotion" (fourth sentence); "This would explain" (fifth sentence); "incompatible" (last sentence)

Paragraph 4

  • Paragraph note
    • Dyson on possibly "complementary" nature of science and paranormal phenomena (both valid but can't be observed simultaneously, like light's waves/particles)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author’s attitude
    • Definition of "complementary":
      • Two descriptions of nature that are both true but cannot be observed at the same time (second sentence)
    • Example of "complementary" phenomena, according to Dyson:
      • Light, which behaves as a wave in some experiments and particles in others, but never both at the same time (last sentence)
    • Dyson's view:
      • Paranormal phenomena and scientific method may be complementary (first sentence)
    • Dyson's attitude: "may be complementary" (first sentence); "cannot see both" (last sentence)

Passage B

Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Author's criticism of Dyson (anecdotal evidence doesn't rebut repeated scientific results that paranormal phenomena do not exist; "complementarity" principle doesn't apply)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author’s attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Dyson's view is ridiculous, and he should know better than to trust anecdotal evidence over clear, repeated scientific results that show that paranormal phenomena do not exist (first through fourth sentences)
      • The principle of the "complementarity" doesn't apply to paranormal phenomena since they either exist or don't exist (and science has only shown they don't exist) (fifth through last sentences)
    • Points of intersection with passage A:
      • References all aspects of Dyson's argument, including his reductionist/traditional dichotomy, his anecdotal evidence, his hypothesis that stress is required to observe the paranormal, and the hypothesis that the paranormal and science are "complementary"
    • Author's attitude: "ridiculous plea" (first sentence); "mysteriously disappear" (first sentence); "A scientist of Dyson’s caliber should know that anecdotes do not make a science" (second sentence); "The only way" (third sentence); "rigorous scientific experiments" (fourth sentence); "results are unequivocal" (fourth sentence); "chimera" (fourth sentence); "does not apply" (sixth sentence); "demonstrated that they cannot" (seventh sentence); "does not change this scientific fact" (last sentence)

Main Points?

Passage A: Because he identifies closer to the "traditional" view concerning science's relationship to human understanding, Dyson does not believe the lack of scientific proof of paranormal phenomena is dispositive, as paranormal phenomena may exist beyond scientific investigation or be complementary with scientific inquiry.

Passage B: Dyson's argument is ridiculous, and he should know better than to rely on anecdotal evidence over clear, repeated scientific results that show that paranormal phenomena do not exist.

Meta-Structure? Overall Relationship?

Relationship - Opposing Viewpoints: This is as unambiguous an example of an Opposing Viewpoint set of passages as you'll ever see. The author of passage B explicitly addresses Dyson's argument from passage A and disagrees with pretty much every point that Dyson makes. Dyson argues that the anecdotal evidence of paranormal phenomena is compelling and might be beyond science's ability to observe (PA, P3, S1-S6). The author of passage B argues that this anecdotal evidence should hold no weight against scientific evidence (PB, P1, S2-S4). Dyson argues that science and the paranormal may be "complementary" (PA, P4, S1), but the author of passage B responds that the notion of "complementarity" doesn't apply to the paranormal (PB, P1, S5-S6). Dyson (somewhat diplomatically) attributes his willingness to believe in the paranormal as a product of his ideological association with the "traditional" view of science and knowledge (PA, P1, S3-S5). The author of passage B argues that this ideology doesn't change the scientific fact that there's no scientific proof of the paranormal (PB, P1, S9).

Last Thoughts?

Since these passages are explicitly in conversation with one another, expect many questions that ask us what Dyson might think of a statement in passage B or what the author of passage B might think about one of Dyson's statements.

Question prompt

Passage A, but not Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: E

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Strategy Overview

Remind ourselves of the general relationship between the passages, and both passages' main points, then head to the answers, using our notes/the passage to find the answer choice that appears in passage A but not B.

Answer Anticipation

This question stem asks us to find the detail that appears in passage A but not B. However, it doesn’t give us much else to go off of. It provides no indication as to the topic of the correct answer or where it’ll show up in passage A. As such, we’ll need to rely on our big-picture understanding of the passage to answer this question. We should start by reminding ourselves of the relationship between the two passages, as that will sometimes reveal a potential difference. We should also remind ourselves of the main point of both passages. From there, we can head to the answer choices. If something in an answer choice doesn't seem familiar or isn't reflected in our notes for passage A, we shouldn’t check the passage to see if it was mentioned in one but not the other. Instead, we’ll table it and move on to the next answer choice. If something seems inconsistent with the main point of passage A or something that we know appeared in passage B, we can eliminate it. If something seems familiar, reflected in our notes for passage A, and consistent with the main point of passage A, we’ll use our notes/highlights/underlines to find the part of the passage that proves the answer choice must be true. We’ll also need to confirm that this detail was not present in passage B. We can use passage B’s main point and our notes for this confirmation. If the detail isn’t present in the main point or our notes, we can use the CTRL/Command + F search function to double-check. If we still can't find that detail, we'll mark that answer choice as a strong contender. Once we eliminate the remaining answer choices, we’ll select that answer choice and move on.

Answer choices

  1. A
    scientific experiments
    Why choice A is not credited

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage A or reflected in our notes for passage A?

    Yes, both the main point and our notes for passage A reference scientific experiments, so we can be certain that this detail appears there. That brings us to our second question ...

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage B or reflected in our notes for passage B?

    Also yes. The main point for passage B mentions "clear, repeated scientific results." Our notes for passage B also refer to "repeated scientific results." So, we can be certain that scientific experiments also show up in passage B. Therefore, we'll need to eliminate (A).

  2. B
    anecdotal evidence
    Why choice B is not credited

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage A or reflected in our notes for passage A?

    Yes. Our note for passage A's third paragraph mentions "abundant, anecdotal" evidence. Therefore, we can be sure that passage A brings up "anecdotal evidence." That brings us to our second question ...

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage B or reflected in our notes for passage B?

    Again, yes. The main point for passage B asserts that Dyson "should know better than to rely on anecdotal evidence." Our notes for passage B also refer to "anecdotal evidence." So, "anecdotal evidence" definitely shows up in passage B, too. We'll need to eliminate (B).

  3. C
    stress
    Why choice C is not credited

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage A or reflected in our notes for passage A?

    Yes. Our note for passage A's third paragraph mentions that paranormal phenomena "may be observable only under stress." So, "stress" definitely shows up in passage A. That takes us to our second question ...

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage B or reflected in our notes for passage B?

    No. Still, we can use CTRL/Command + F to search for "stress" just to confirm that it's not in passage B. Upon using that search function, we'll find that the author of passage B mentions stress in the first sentence. So, we'll need to eliminate (C).

  4. D
    reductionism
    Why choice D is not credited

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage A or reflected in our notes for passage A?

    Yep. Both the main point of passage A and our note for passage A's first paragraph brings up "reductionism." We can be sure that this appears in passage A. That will take us to the second question ...

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage B or reflected in our notes for passage B?

    No. Still, we should use CTRL/Command + F to search for "reduction" just to confirm that it's not in passage B. Upon using that search function, we'll find that the author of passage B mentions reductionism in the final sentence. So, we'll need to eliminate (D).

  5. E
    the dual nature of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem

    If you've already eliminated the other answer choices, you can select this answer choice. If you've eliminated the rest of the options, here's the step-by-step analysis you can take ...

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage A or reflected in our notes for passage A?

    Yes. Our note for passage A's last paragraph describes "light's waves/particles." That definitely counts as mentioning "the dual nature of light." That will take us to the second question ...

    Is this consistent with the main point of passage B or reflected in our notes for passage B?

    No. Still, we should use CTRL/Command + F to search for "light" just to confirm that it's not in passage B. Upon using that search function, we won't find any references to the dual nature of life. We can be confident — albeit not certain unless we read all of passage B again — that this detail isn't in passage B. Once we eliminate the remaining answer choices, we can select (E).

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.

View all discussions Start a discussion