Philosopher: Scientists talk about the pursuit of truth, but like most

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

This argument contains an error of composition, one where the status-enhancing activities of most scientists are said to prove that the scientific community as a whole acts to enhance its status.

Answer choice (A): This answer choice describes a compositional error, but not the one that occurs in the stimulus. The stimulus makes a judgment about the scientific community as a whole whereas this answer states that a judgment is made about each and every scientist. The community as a whole is different than each and every scientist, and thus this answer is incorrect. If you are thinking about the difference between the community as a whole and each member within the community, consider this statement: “Our community is against stealing.” While that may be true, there may also be individual members of the community who are thieves and have no qualm about stealing.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer, and the answer describes the correct compositional error made by the philosopher.

Answer choice (C): The answer is wrong—the author does not presume that the aim of personal career enhancement never advances the pursuit of truth. Consider the second sentence: “Accordingly, the professional activities of most scientists are directed toward personal career enhancement, and only incidentally toward the pursuit of truth. The portion that states “only incidentally toward the pursuit of truth” indicates that the author allows for the possibility that career-enhancement activities can result in activities that pursue truth, even if only a little bit. But, since that contradicts the force of never, this answer is incorrect. This is the most frequently chosen wrong answer, as about 20% of test takers select this choice.

Answer choice (D): This answer choice describes the Uncertain Use of a Term. The term “self-interested” is used only once in the argument (at the end of the first sentence), and the remainder of the argument is consistent with the generally accepted meaning of “self-interested” and uses that meaning unambiguously.

Answer choice (E): The argument in the stimulus is about the relationships of parts and wholes, not about cause and effect. This answer, which describes reasoning from an effect in order to infer its cause, is therefore incorrect. An example of the reasoning described in this answer choice would be: “We know this window was broken this afternoon, and only one pane of the window was broken. We also know the pane was broken by a circular object. Therefore, a baseball was the cause of the broken window.