omraan wrote:
Archit143 wrote:
The answer must be A..
Research analysts found something, than someother research companies found errors in the what was intially carried out by the researchers....
Point is the new research did nt put fwd anythn new except the fact that earlier analysts made some mistake...
Hence A must be the answer
Consider kudos If my post helps!!!
Archit
I know A is true, but would sb plz let me know why C is wrong??
tnx in advnc
Hi Omraan. Very good question.
How to attack the question.
This is a
flaw of reasoning question, in order to get the correct answer you have to
generalize the stimulus to abstract pattern. That makes this kind of question be one of the most difficult types in CR.
I would generalize the stimulus as followings:
A makes a claim that X is true
B found that A has errors
B makes a claim that X is NOT trueThe problem here is:
X itself is CORRECT, B, however, found that A (the scientific method) has errors ==> B concludes X is NOT true. That is wrong reasoning. If B wants to prove X is NOT true, B has to find evidences that show X is NOT true, not evidences that show A has errors in its method.
A says: presumes, without providing justification, that if something is not proved to be true, then it must be wrong.
"Something" = the fact: metals currently used in space electronics can be replaced with this element
"not proved to be true" = the recent analysis does not show the fact is true (the analysis has error)
"then it must be wrong" = the fact that the analysis shows must be wrong.
The research by an independent laboratory
only shows the recent analysis has error ==> conclude that the fact "metals currently used in space electronics can be replaced with this element" is wrong ==> Flaw in reasoning.
Hence , A is the correct. answer.
Similar example:Galileo Galilei discovered that the Earth moves around the Sun.
The Church found that Galileo Galilei had some errors in his method
The Church concluded that "the Earth moves around the Sun" is wrong.You see the same flaw of reasoning?
The fact that "the Earth moves around the Sun" itself is ALWAYS correct.
C is wrong, why?C says: fails to consider the possibility of further accurate chemical analyses of the new element.
Please see the logical reasoning below:A makes claim that X is true
B also makes a claim that X is not true
B concludes that X is not true.==> Flaw of reasoning: Because
B makes conclusion based on B's analysis only, so B fails to consider the possibility of further accurate analyses.
This flaw of reasoning DIFFERS from that in the question.Back to the question, C says "there should be more further accurate analyses"
==>
C attacks the argument by focusing on errors of analysis, not errors of the scientific method ==> C does not show the flaw of reasoning we need.Hope it helps.