Common sense suggests that we know our own thoughts directly, but that

Question

New Project RC Butler 2019  -  Practice 2 RC Passages Everyday   
Passage # 129, Date : 06-APR-2019
 This post is a part of New Project RC Butler 2019 .  Click here for Details

Common sense suggests that we know our own thoughts directly, but that we infer the thoughts of other people. The former process is noninferential and infallible, while the latter is based on others' behavior and can always be wrong. But this assumption is challenged by experiments in psychology demonstrating that in certain circumstances young children tend to misdescribe their own thoughts regarding simple phenomena while nonetheless correctly describing those phenomena. It seems that these children have the same thoughts that adults have regarding the phenomena but are much less capable of identifying these thoughts. Some psychologists argue that this indicates that one's awareness of one's own thoughts is every bit as inferential as one's awareness of another person's thoughts. According to their interpretation of the experiments, thoughts are unobservable entities that, among other things, help to explain why we act as we do. It follows from this that we are wrong to think of ourselves as having noninferential and infallible access to our own thoughts.

Recognizing an obligation to explain why we cling so tenaciously to an illusory belief in noninferential and infallible knowledge of our own thoughts, these psychologists suggest that this illusion is analogous to what happens to us when we become experts in a particular area. Greater expertise appears to change not only our knowledge of the area as a whole, but our very perception of entities in that area. It appears to us that we become able to see and to grasp these entities and their relations directly, whereas before we could only make inferences about them. For instance, chess experts claim the ability to see without calculation whether a position is weak or strong. From a psychological perspective, we become so expert in making incredibly fast introspective inferences about our thinking that we fail to notice that we are making them. This failure leads naturally to the supposition that there is no way for us to be wrong in our identification of what we ourselves think because we believe we are perceiving it directly.

In claiming that we have only inferential access to our thoughts, the psychologists come perilously close to claiming that we base our inferences about what we ourselves are thinking solely on observations of our own external behavior. But, in fact, their arguments do not commit them to this claim; the psychologists suggest that we are somehow able to base our inferences about what we are thinking on internal cognitive activity that is not itself thought—e.g., fleeting and instantaneous sensations and emotions. The frequent occurrence of such internal activities explains why we develop the capacity to make quick and reliable inferences. Their internality makes it impossible for anyone else to make an inference based on them that contradicts our own. Thus, they are crucial in creating the illusion of noninferentiality and infallibility.   1 
 1. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

(A) Only experts within a given domain have noninferential and infallible access to their own thoughts; other people must infer their own thoughts as they do others' thoughts.
(B) In opposition to the common belief that thoughts are directly perceived, some psychologists argue that people infer what their own thoughts are.
(C) In response to the common belief that thoughts are directly perceived, some psychologists claim that this belief is an illusion resulting from our inability to make quick and reliable inferences.
(D) Some psychologists have recently attributed children's failure to give an accurate description of their own thoughts to their lack of expertise.
(E) Some psychologists hold that people are able to make inferences about what they are thinking that are based solely on observing their own external behavior.
 2 
 2. Which one of the following, if true, would most call into question the psychologists' interpretation of the experiments with children (fourth and fifth sentences of the passage)?

(A) Some children who took part in the experiments were no less capable than some adults at identifying their own thoughts.
(B) Experiments with older children found that they were as accurate as adults in identifying their thoughts.
(C) The limited language skills possessed by young children make it difficult for them to accurately communicate their thoughts.
(D) Most young children cannot be expected to know the difference between direct and indirect access to one's thoughts.
(E) The psychologists who conducted the experiments with children were concerned with psychological issues other than the nature of people's access to their own thoughts.
 3 
 3. Based on the passage, the author is most likely to believe which one of the following about the view that "we base our inferences about what we ourselves are thinking solely on observations of our own external behavior" (first sentence of the last paragraph)?

(A) It constitutes a denial of the possibility of scientifically studying thinking processes.
(B) It has often been misunderstood by psychologists.
(C) It was the prevailing view until undermined by recent psychology experiments.
(D) It seems to contradict common sense but is basically sound.
(E) It is not considered to be an intellectually defensible position.
 4 
 4. Which one of the following is most closely analogous to the explanation in the passage of how persons fail to notice that they are making inferences about their thoughts?

(A) An anthropologist cannot describe his own culture accurately because he has become too familiar with its workings and therefore takes them for granted.
(B) Science is limited with regard to studying the human mind because science necessarily depends on human reasoning.
(C) As they develop, children become increasingly comfortable with formal abstraction and therefore become vulnerable to failures to learn from concrete experiences.
(D) Judges are barred from trying cases involving their family members because of a potential conflict of interest.
(E) A ship's commander must delegate certain duties and decisions to other officers on her ship because she is too busy to attend to those duties and decisions.
 5 
 5. According to the passage, one's gaining greater expertise in a field appears to result in 
 
(A) an altered way of expressing one's judgments about issues in that field
(B) a more detail-oriented approach to questions in that field
(C) an increased tendency to ignore one's own errors in judgment within that field
(D) a substantively different way of understanding relations within that field
(E) a reduced reliance on sensations and emotions when inferring one's thoughts regarding that field
 6 
 6. According to the psychologists cited in the passage, the illusion of direct knowledge of our own thoughts arises from the fact that

(A) we ignore the feedback that we receive regarding the inaccuracy of the inferences we make about our thought processes
(B) knowledge of our own thoughts is usually unmediated due to our expertise, and we simply overlook instances where this is not the case
(C) we are unaware of the inferential processes that allow us to become aware of our thoughts
(D) our inferences regarding our own thoughts are generally extremely accurate, as are our perceptions of the world
(E) our inferences regarding our own thoughts are sometimes clouded and uncertain, as are our perceptions of the world
 7 
 7. It can most reasonably be inferred that the choice of children as the subjects of the psychology experiments discussed in the passage was advantageous to the experimenters for which one of the following reasons?

(A) Experiments involving children are more likely to give interesting results because children are more creative than adults.
(B) Adults are more likely than children to give inaccurate reports of their thought processes.
(C) Since adults are infallible in their access to their own thoughts, only the thought processes of children shed light on the nature of inference.
(D) Mental processes are sometimes easier to study in children because children are more likely than adults to make certain cognitive errors.
(E) Children are less experienced than adults in inferring the thoughts of others from observations of their behavior.

Source:   LSAT Official PrepTest 81   ( June 2017 ) 
 Difficulty Level:   700

moropa2018 · Accepted Answer

Passage Gist:

Paragraph 1: 
Introduces the idea that: We know our thoughts instinctively and this process is noninferential and infallable (cannot go wrong) but other people thoughts are inferred and always can go wrong.
But the author is saying that the notion that one's thoughts are non-inferential and infallable can be challenged by experiments in psychology.
The experiment is - In certain circumstances young children misdescribe their own thoughts. According to the interpretation of these experiments,we are wrong to think that our own thoughts are noninferential and infallible.

Paragraph 2 
This paragraph explains why we think our thoughts are non-inferential and infallible.
An expert in a field feels like he/she intuitively thinks about the solution but in reality he/she makes incredibly fast introspective inferences that he/she fails to notice that he/she is making them. This failure to notice leads us to believe that there is no way for us to be wrong/infallible about our own thoughts because we believe we are perceiving it directly rather than inferencing (remember?? inferencing can make us go wrong).

Paragraph 3: 
Here in this paragraph, the author gives a justification for why we believe our thoughts are non-inferential and infallible.The frequent occurrence of internal activities explains why we develop the capacity to make quick and reliable inferences. It is impossible for anyone else to make an inference based on these internal activities/ thinking process (the very nature of which is they occur internally, so nobody can know these internal activities) and hence our own thoughts cannot be contradicted by others. Thus, they are crucial in creating the illusion of noninferentiality and infallibility.

Quick recap:
Basic belief is that one's own thoughts are non-inferential and infallable. But the author does not agree with this. He says everyone infer their thoughts but they do not know because the process happens intuitively and internally, so they have an illusion that one's own thoughts are non-inferential and infallable.

1. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

(A) Only experts within a given domain have noninferential and infallible access to their own thoughts; other people must infer their own thoughts as they do others' thoughts.  Not true. Everybody, including experts infer their own thoughts according to the author. 
(B) In opposition to the common belief that thoughts are directly perceived, some psychologists argue that people infer what their own thoughts are.  In line with our quick review. 
(C) In response to the common belief that thoughts are directly perceived, some psychologists claim that this belief is an illusion resulting from our inability to make quick and reliable inferences.  The first half of the choice is true, but the part - inability to make quick and reliable inferences- is not true. The opposite of it is true. We make quick inference 
(D) Some psychologists have recently attributed children's failure to give an accurate description of their own thoughts to their lack of expertise.  Young children were brought up just as an example of experiment in psychology. Not the main point of the passage. 
(E) Some psychologists hold that people are able to make inferences about what they are thinking that are based solely on observing their own external behavior.  Just a point made by some psychologists. This does not communicate the whole idea of the passage

2. Which one of the following, if true, would most call into question the psychologists' interpretation of the experiments with children (fourth and fifth sentences of the passage)?

psychologists' interpretation of the experiments with children:Based on children's misdescription of their own thoughts, Psychologists interpret that we are wrong to think that our own thoughts are noninferential and infallible.

What would if true, would most call into question/ Weaken the above conclusion?

(A) Some children who took part in the experiments were no less capable than some adults at identifying their own thoughts.  If anything, this would strengthen the conclusion. 
(B) Experiments with older children found that they were as accurate as adults in identifying their thoughts.  Out of scope. The discussion is about young children 
(C) The limited language skills possessed by young children make it difficult for them to accurately communicate their thoughts.  This option is discrediting the children's ability to describe their own thoughts. Hence, the conclusion based on this expression cannot be relied upon. 
(D) Most young children cannot be expected to know the difference between direct and indirect access to one's thoughts.  Out of scope. No mention of direct or indirect access to one's thoughts. 
(E) The psychologists who conducted the experiments with children were concerned with psychological issues other than the nature of people's access to their own thoughts.  Irrelevant and out of scope.

3. Based on the passage, the author is most likely to believe which one of the following about the view that "we base our inferences about what we ourselves are thinking solely on observations of our own external behavior" (first sentence of the last paragraph)?

The bold part is the opinion of the author and the author is not in agreement with the mentioned view.

(A) It constitutes a denial of the possibility of scientifically studying thinking processes.  Scientifically studying thinking processes is out of scope of the passage. 
(B) It has often been misunderstood by psychologists.  Not true. Not supported from passage 
(C) It was the prevailing view until undermined by recent psychology experiments.  Nothing from the passage indicates that the view was undermined  
(D) It seems to contradict common sense but is basically sound.  Agreeing. So, not correct. 
(E) It is not considered to be an intellectually defensible position.  This option comes close to non-agreement of the author.

4. Which one of the following is most closely analogous to the explanation in the passage of how persons fail to notice that they are making inferences about their thoughts? 
A person fails to notice that they are making inferences about their thoughts because the process is very intuitive.

(A) An anthropologist cannot describe his own culture accurately because he has become too familiar with its workings and therefore takes them for granted.  Correct because anthropologist is intuitive. 
 Rest all options are completely irrelevant. 
(B) Science is limited with regard to studying the human mind because science necessarily depends on human reasoning. 
(C) As they develop, children become increasingly comfortable with formal abstraction and therefore become vulnerable to failures to learn from concrete experiences.
(D) Judges are barred from trying cases involving their family members because of a potential conflict of interest.
(E) A ship's commander must delegate certain duties and decisions to other officers on her ship because she is too busy to attend to those duties and decisions.

5. According to the passage, one's gaining greater expertise in a field appears to result in

(A) an altered way of expressing one's judgments about issues in that field.  Altered way of expressing is out of scope of the passage. 
(B) a more detail-oriented approach to questions in that field.  Not supported by the passage. 
(C) an increased tendency to ignore one's own errors in judgment within that field.  This line of thought is not supported by the passage. 
(D) a substantively different way of understanding relations within that field.  Yes. Supported as shown in the quoted text. 
(E) a reduced reliance on sensations and emotions when inferring one's thoughts regarding that field.  Not supported by the passage.

6. According to the psychologists cited in the passage, the illusion of direct knowledge of our own thoughts arises from the fact that

(A) we ignore the feedback that we receive regarding the inaccuracy of the inferences we make about our thought processes.  Not Supported by the passage. 
(B) knowledge of our own thoughts is usually unmediated due to our expertise, and we simply overlook instances where this is not the case.  Not Supported by the passage. 
(C) we are unaware of the inferential processes that allow us to become aware of our thoughts.  Yes. Because the process is intuitive, we are unaware of it happening. Hence, we believe that it is a direct knowledge, not an inferential one. 
(D) our inferences regarding our own thoughts are generally extremely accurate, as are our perceptions of the world.  May be true, but this statement does not support why we believe our thoughts are because of our direct knowledge. 
(E) our inferences regarding our own thoughts are sometimes clouded and uncertain, as are our perceptions of the world.  Not Supported by the passage. .  Never anywhere it is mentioned that our thoughts are clouded and uncertain.

7. It can most reasonably be inferred that the choice of children as the subjects of the psychology experiments discussed in the passage was advantageous to the experimenters for which one of the following reasons?

(A) Experiments involving children are more likely to give interesting results because children are more creative than adults.  Creativity is not the aspect of study. Hence, not the right answer. 
(B) Adults are more likely than children to give inaccurate reports of their thought processes.  Cannot be inferred. 
(C) Since adults are infallible in their access to their own thoughts, only the thought processes of children shed light on the nature of inference.  Nature of inference is not the object of study. 
(D) Mental processes are sometimes easier to study in children because children are more likely than adults to make certain cognitive errors.  Correct. 
(E) Children are less experienced than adults in inferring the thoughts of others from observations of their behavior.  Thoughts of others are not under study.

guptaaditi994 · Answer

P1- 
Common sense states
-own thoughts ??? infallible 
-others - always wrong
Challenged by psycho
Child mistake own ??? capability issue
So as inferential
We can think ??? wrong fact stated

P2- 
Reason by psycho 
Experts ??? perception changes
Fail to notice 
No way wrong

P3 ??? 
Proving our inference but we 
Only external 
Not fully commit and suggest 
Some thought on internal cog
Eg ???frequent activity ??? quick decisions
No one judge us better than us ???internal
Illusion

A1. (B) In opposition to the common belief that thoughts are directly perceived, some psychologists argue that people infer what their own thoughts are.
Opposite to common sense, psychologists believe that people can infer their thoughts with explanations and examples

A2. (C) The limited language skills possessed by young children make it difficult for them to accurately communicate their thoughts.
Para 1 - It seems that these children have the same thoughts that adults have regarding the phenomena but are much less capable of identifying these thoughts.

A3. (E) It is not considered to be an intellectually defensible position.
As psychologists arguments do not commit to this claim.

A4. (A) An anthropologist cannot describe his own culture accurately because he has become too familiar with its workings and therefore takes them for granted.
 From a psychological perspective, we become so expert in making incredibly fast introspective inferences about our thinking that we fail to notice that we are making them.

A5. (D) a substantively different way of understanding relations within that field
It appears to us that we become able to see and to grasp these entities and their relations directly, whereas before we could only make inferences about them

A6. (C) we are unaware of the inferential processes that allow us to become aware of our thoughts
We are in a illusion as we perceive the world wrongly.

A7. (D) Mental processes are sometimes easier to study in children because children are more likely than adults to make certain cognitive errors.
Children have less developed cognitive skills and can make those errors.

Mizar18 · Answer

Hi  LeoGT   SajjadAhmad

Can you post explanation for Q7?

Thanks!

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

7. It can most reasonably be inferred that the choice of children as the subjects of the psychology experiments discussed in the passage was advantageous to the experimenters for which one of the following reasons?

Difficulty Level:   750

Explanation

The question stem asks,  "Why was it advantageous to study CHILDREN?"

All we know is that children tended to misdescribe stuff regarding their thoughts, and this allowed psychologists to  "challenge the assumption"  (line 4-5) of common sense that we know our own thoughts directly.

So we need the safest answer choice that hews closely to those ideas.

(A) "Creative"  is out of scope.

(B)  This is seemingly the opposite of what we've read. The CHILDREN are the ones who misdescribed their thoughts, so if anything it seems like CHILDREN are more likely than adults to give inaccurate reports.

(C)  This first claim contradicts the entire point of the passage. We are far from sure that  "adults are infallible in their access to their own thoughts" .

(D)  Soft wording,  "sometimes easier" , and  "children are more likely to make certain cognitive errors"  can be matched to 5-8, where children misdescribed their thoughts.

(E)  This experiment was about inferring one's OWN thoughts, not the thoughts of others.

Answer: D

Explanation credit: Manhattan LSAT

Hope it helps

auradediligodo · Answer

Hi everyone,

Got 6/7 correct in 17:15 minutes.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P1

Paragraph one challenges a common belief according to which we know directly our thoughts (such activity is non inferential and infallible) while we need to make inferences to know other people thoughts (but we can always be wrong). Such belief is challenged by an experiments on children. The experiment led to results according to which children had difficulties in describing their own thoughts. Hence we don't know directly our own thoughts but we need to make inferences.

Brief summary:  The results of an experiment on children challenges the common belief that we know directly our own thoughts

P2

In paragraph 2 an explanation of the results of the experiment is given. The results are explained through an analogy that involves situations in which people become experts in something. In fact, when we become expert in something we increase our knowledge and we can perceive the entities related to the field we became experts in much better than before and in a different way. Furthermore, before becoming experts we had to make inferences. Once we become experts we are so fast while making inferences that we think we are not making inferences and that we are just grasping the truth. That's why we think that we directly know our thoughts, that we don't make inferences and that we are infallible.

Brief summary:  The reason why we think we directly know our own thoughts is that we are so fast while making inferences that we don't realize it

P3

Paragraph 3 refutes the fact that psychologists think that we infer our own thoughts only from our external behavior. In fact psychologists think that we make inferences based on some sort of internal cognitive activity. Such internal cognitive ability makes it difficult for other people to make inferences about others and it is crucial to understand why we think that our own thoughts are non inferential and infallible.

Brief summary: The role of internal cognitive ability

Main point

The main point is to explain why we don't know our own thoughts directly through an experiment done on children

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

Pre-thinking

Main point question

Refer to main point and summaries above

(A) Only experts within a given domain have noninferential and infallible access to their own thoughts; other people must infer their own thoughts as they do others' thoughts.
 Per the passage non inferential access does not exist

(B)   In opposition to the common belief that thoughts are directly perceived, some psychologists argue that people infer what their own thoughts are.
 In line with pre-thinking

(C) In response to the common belief that thoughts are directly perceived, some psychologists claim that this belief is an illusion resulting   from our inability to make quick and reliable inferences.  
 inconsistent because of the highlighted portion

(D) Some psychologists have recently attributed children's failure to give an accurate description of their own thoughts to their lack of expertise.
 This is the reasoning behind the result of the experiment but it is not the main point of the author. The main point is to refute a common belief through this finding

(E) Some psychologists hold that people are able to make inferences about what they are thinking that are based solely on observing their own external behavior.
 Paragraph 4 directly contradicts this option

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Which one of the following, if true, would most call into question the psychologists' interpretation of the experiments with children (fourth and fifth sentences of the passage)?

Pre-thinking

Weaken question

The reasoning behind the psychologists' experiment is that children are not as experts as adults and hence they take more time to make inferences. 
Hence a good weakener would suggest that the children taken in the experiments were experts or more experts than adults in the things they were describing.

(A) Some children who took part in the experiments were no less capable than some adults at identifying their own thoughts.
 irrelevant

(B) Experiments with older children found that they were as accurate as adults in identifying their thoughts.
 experiments with other children are out of scope

(C)   The limited language skills possessed by young children make it difficult for them to accurately communicate their thoughts.
 This option suggests a lack of expertise, correct.

(D) Most young children cannot be expected to know the difference between direct and indirect access to one's thoughts.
 irrelevant to the argument

(E) The psychologists who conducted the experiments with children were concerned with psychological issues other than the nature of people's access to their own thoughts.
 irrelevant

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Based on the passage, the author is most likely to believe which one of the following about the view that "we base our inferences about what we ourselves are thinking solely on observations of our own external behavior" (first sentence of the last paragraph)?

Pre-thinking

Inference question

Now the author uses words such as   perilously  ... We can infer that basing our own inferences solely on observations of our own external behavior is incorrect.

(A) It constitutes a denial of the possibility of scientifically studying thinking processes.
 out of scope

(B) It has often been misunderstood by psychologists.
 nowhere in the passage we can infer this statement

(C) It was the prevailing view until undermined by recent psychology experiments.
 we don't know whether such view had currency in the past....

(D) It seems to contradict common sense but is basically sound.
 we do not have elements suggesting that such theory is sound...

(E)   It is not considered to be an intellectually defensible position.
 This option is worded a little different with respect of our pre-thought inference but the meaning that it conveys is the same: such position is incorrect

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Which one of the following is most closely analogous to the explanation in the passage of how persons fail to notice that they are making inferences about their thoughts?

Pre-thinking

Analogous statement question

The logic behind the explanation is that people become so expert in a field that they make inferences too rapidly to realize them

(A)   An anthropologist cannot describe his own culture accurately because he has become too familiar with its workings and therefore takes them for granted.
 although the passage does not really mention accuracy, this option mentions elements such as familiarity and "taking them for granted" that are typical of a person who became an expert in their field and who make inferences so fast that they do not even realize them

(B) Science is limited with regard to studying the human mind because science necessarily depends on human reasoning.
 out of scope

(C) As they develop, children become increasingly comfortable with formal abstraction and therefore become vulnerable to failures to learn from concrete experiences.
 out of scope

(D) Judges are barred from trying cases involving their family members because of a potential conflict of interest.
 out of scope

(E) A ship's commander must delegate certain duties and decisions to other officers on her ship because she is too busy to attend to those duties and decisions.
 out of scope

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. According to the passage, one's gaining greater expertise in a field appears to result in

Pre-thinking

Detail question

The passage states that as we become more experts our ability to make inferences speed up and we don't realize anymore that we are making inferences. Hence we think that we know our thoughts and that we are non inferential and infallible

(A) an altered way of expressing one's judgments about issues in that field
 judgments are not discussed

(B) a more detail-oriented approach to questions in that field
 such approach is not discussed

(C) an increased tendency to ignore one's own errors in judgment within that field
 ignoring errors is not mentioned

(D)   a substantively different way of understanding relations within that field
 From P2: "  Greater expertise appears to change not only our knowledge of the area as a whole, but our very perception of entities in that area.   "

(E) a reduced reliance on sensations and emotions when inferring one's thoughts regarding that field
 such reliance is never discussed

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. According to the psychologists cited in the passage, the illusion of direct knowledge of our own thoughts arises from the fact that

Pre-thinking

Detail question

Such illusion could come from 2 things:
#1: we are very fast to make inferences (from P2)
#2: internal cognitive ability (from P3)

(A) we ignore the feedback that we receive regarding the inaccuracy of the inferences we make about our thought processes
 feedback is not discussed

(B) knowledge of our own thoughts is usually unmediated due to our expertise, and we simply overlook instances where this is not the case
 not mentioned

(C)   we are unaware of the inferential processes that allow us to become aware of our thoughts
 in line with pre-thinking

(D) our inferences regarding our own thoughts are generally extremely accurate, as are our perceptions of the world
 not mentioned

(E) our inferences regarding our own thoughts are sometimes clouded and uncertain, as are our perceptions of the world
 not mentioned

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. It can most reasonably be inferred that the choice of children as the subjects of the psychology experiments discussed in the passage was advantageous to the experimenters for which one of the following reasons?

Pre-thinking

Inference question

Let's analyze the choices. We can infer that the study was made on children because there is an high probability that they are not experts in the things they attempt to describe

(A) Experiments involving children are more likely to give interesting results because children are more creative than adults.
 irrelevant.

(B) Adults are more likely than children to give inaccurate reports of their thought processes.
 irrelevant

(C) Since adults are infallible in their access to their own thoughts, only the thought processes of children shed light on the nature of inference.
 adults are not infallible

(D)   Mental processes are sometimes easier to study in children because children are more likely than adults to make certain cognitive errors.
 We can choose this option through the POE and because it talks in a very general way. Note that all the other choices were eliminated on deterministic errors.

(E) Children are less experienced than adults in inferring the thoughts of others from observations of their behavior.
 This option at first glance is tempting but it talks about inferences of the thoughts of others while the psychologists are trying to prove that people infer also their own thoughts

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is a good day to be alive!

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

Good question! This was a challenging passage. Here's the structure:

First paragraph: Common sense position is articulated. The author notes that some experts are challenging this position. Reasoning behind this opposition described.

Second paragraph: Implications and further explanation of these experts' position. Example included.

Third paragraph: Potential danger or questionable implications of this position described. Experts' position does not make this mistake.

If we wished to describe the main point, we should start by asking what the overall topic of the passage is:

The passage concerns a theory of mind proposed by some psychologists. This theory is contrary to common sense understanding but not without merit.

Now let's summarize the purpose of the passage:

The author describes and expounds upon this theory and its implications without making a definitive commitment for or against it, but the overall tone tends to suggest at least an openness to its implications.

Now combine the description of the topic with the general purpose of the passage to form a prediction of the main point:

This passage describes and explains a psychological theory about thought-processes that has fascinating implications in direct contrast to common-sense understanding.

(B) is a solid match. We hit the tone pretty head-on. It describes the contrast between the theory in question and the common-sense understanding. This answer doesn't over commit the author to a position for or against the theory. This answer keeps the focus on the theory, as we prephrased.

(C) seems like a possible contender. We do talk about the disagreement with the common-sense belief that thoughts are directly perceived. However, note the choice of words here. In (C) it's "in response to the common belief." (B) has "in opposition to the common belief." Which is the better match? Are the psychologists reacting against the common belief (note the causal implications here), or is their theory simply in contrast to the common belief? The latter is a better match. Now notice the second phrase in (C). We're kinda on the right track here, but this phrase is in fact a misstatement of the psychologists' theory. The psychologists don't claim that this belief is an illusion resulting from an inability to make quick inferences. Rather, it might be better described as an illusion resulting from the ability to make quick inferences. Further, this answer choice shifts the focus away from a description of what the theory actually is to a description of how the common-sense view is problematic, in the view of the psychologists. Thus, the gist of this answer choice is on the wrong subject.

Hypothesis: Human beings, both children and adults, know their own thoughts directly, noninferentially, and infallibly, but know the thoughts of others only inferentially.

Experimental Results: Children cannot describe their thoughts nearly as accurately as adults can.

Psychologists' Conclusion: Both children and adults know their own thoughts only inferentially, just as if they were trying to puzzle out the thoughts of others; adults become "experts" and make inferences so quickly they no longer can be recognized as inferences.

The psychologists' interpretation is that kids not reporting the same thoughts as adults means no one can actually observe their thoughts directly. C challenges this by offering another explanation for why kids don't report the same thoughts; it isn't that no one directly knows their thoughts, it is just that kids can't communicate what they directly observe about their own thoughts.

"Perilously close"   implies "imminent danger." In other words, by adopting such a position, these psychologists would have put themselves in jeopardy of having to argue for an absurd position. I think that the author need not necessarily agree that it is an "intellectually indefensible" position; however, the statement beginning in line 41 provides adequate evidence that answer choice (E) contains the statement that the author would be most likely to agree with among the options provided.  Process of elimination is actually a sound strategy here

Many are confused between A and B, will try to clear that.

Here, we're looking for an answer choice that comes closest to mirroring lines 35-40. "A" does that: it is an example of someone who knows something so well that they don't notice the details of what is happening anymore. B, on the other hand, gives an example of something relying on human reasoning, which matches some of the logic of the passage but does not match the explanation referenced in this question.

We need to refer back to the passage and look for evidence to support our answer.

"Greater expertise appears to change not only our knowledge of the area as a whole, but our very perception of entities in that area").

Matches (D) a substantively different way of understanding relations within that field

"From a psychological perspective... This failure leads naturally to the supposition that there is no way for us to be wrong in our identification of what we ourselves think because we believe we are perceiving it directly"

C is wrong because the answer C points to an increased tendency to ignore one's own errors in judgment, whereas the passage is pointing to one's tendency to ignore our fallible knowledge of own our thoughts.

Begin by going back to the passage and finding the relevant citation. This question seems to concern the topic of the second paragraph, taken more or less in its entirety. Let's be clear on what the question is asking so we know how to read this information and where to direct our attention while reading. The question asks how this illusion "arises." Let's see what the evidence in the second paragraph shows.

a. Illusion of noninferential knowledge of thoughts analogous to development of expertise.
b. When beginning to study something, reasoning processes are long, deliberate, and obvious. 
c. As expertise develops, these reasoning processes become faster and faster, until these processes are so fast as to be imperceptible.
d. Example of chess expertise used.

If the above points illustrate how this "illusion" arises, how could we briefly describe this process? In effect, the thought-inference process becomes so fast that people don't even notice it. This is our prethinking and a pretty good match for answer choice (C).

For this one, you should reread the first paragraph with the intention of identifying what makes children good candidates for these cognitive experiments. What is the distinction between children and adults? In what way does this distinction enable psychologists to make useful observations.

The evidence is on line 8: children, unlike adults, "misdescribe their own thoughts." These erroneous descriptions are key to making inferences, since otherwise (line 11) children "have the same thoughts that adults have."

Thus, a prethink could be, "They make observable errors describing their own thoughts."

This is a good match for the credited response, (D).

akt715 · Answer

This failure leads naturally to the supposition that there is no way for us to be wrong in our identification of what we ourselves think because we believe we are perceiving it directly.----isn't this sentence supports option C in question 5

akt715 · Answer

the psychologists come perilously close to claiming that we base our inferences about what we ourselves are thinking solely on observations of our own external behavior. Since psychologists came close to this inference , can't we infer from this that most phycologists misunderstood this and hence the answer for Q3 , would probably be B. Because for E , there is nothing in the passage that even lead us to think about this option.

ashuturkar17 · Answer

Sajjad1994  
Please explain Q6!
How is option C supported by the passage?

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hi akt715

This is a very tough question indeed, the problem with B is that the author suggests that some might misinterpret the psychologists’ claims as meaning the quoted view, but not that psychologists themselves do.

The question is asking what the author thinks about the quoted view. In the third paragraph, the author states that the psychologists come  “perilously close”  to claiming the quoted view, but that their arguments do not, in fact, commit them to it. The credited response will reflect this disagreement with the statement.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

6. According to the psychologists cited in the passage, the illusion of direct knowledge of our own thoughts arises from the fact that

Difficulty Level:   700

Explanation

The question is asking what causes the illusion of direct knowledge of our own thoughts. The passage states in the  second paragraph  that this is prompted by the fact that we become experts at making inferences. The credited response will be the answer that is directly supported by the text of the passage.

A. No.  In the  third paragraph , the author notes that the inferences we make are reliable.

B. No.  This answer choice takes language from the passage and distorts it. The passage discusses that our expertise in making inferences is what causes us to overlook the fact that we make them.

C.  Yes.   This answer accurately paraphrases the author’s discussion at the end of the  second paragraph.

D. No.  While it is true that our inferences about our own thoughts are reliable, the passage does not claim that we make extremely accurate perceptions of the world.

E. No.  The passage does not discuss clouded thoughts or uncertainty.

Answer: C

CKHE · Answer

Answers to questions 3, 5 and 7, the ones that I found to be challenging.

3. Based on the passage, the author is most likely to believe which one of the following about the view that "we base our inferences about what we ourselves are thinking solely on observations of our own external behavior" (first sentence of the last paragraph)?

(A) It constitutes a denial of the possibility of scientifically studying thinking processes.
 E - Not mentioned or implied in the passage.

(B) It has often been misunderstood by psychologists.
 E - Para 3 states that the Psychologists come perilously close to claiming this; however, their arguments do not commit them to this claim
(C) It was the prevailing view until undermined by recent psychology experiments.
 E - This is not mentioned anywhere in the passage

(D) It seems to contradict common sense but is basically sound.
 E - This statement by the author - "In claiming that we have only inferential access to our thoughts, the psychologists  come perilously close  to claiming that we base our inferences about what we ourselves are thinking solely on observations of our own external behavior." clearly shows that the s/he does not consider the view as sound.

(E) It is not considered to be an intellectually defensible position. 
 E - Since the author does not agree to the view, s/he will mostly likely believe (E).

5. According to the passage, one's gaining greater expertise in a field appears to result in

(A) an altered way of expressing one's judgments about issues in that field
 E - 'Way of expressing one's judgement' is not discussed in the passage

(B) a more detail-oriented approach to questions in that field
 E - Approach is not discussed in the passage

(C) an increased tendency to ignore one's own errors in judgment within that field
 E - This is confusing since the passage states - "This failure leads naturally to the supposition that there is no way for us to be wrong in our identification of what we ourselves think because we believe we are perceiving it directly". 
 However, there is no mention of  increased tendency  to ignore one's error. Only that the inferences are made so fast that we fail to notice that we are making them.

(D) a substantively different way of understanding relations within that field 
 E - correct. "Greater expertise appears to change not only our knowledge of the area as a whole,  but our very perception of entities in that area " (para 2)

(E) a reduced reliance on sensations and emotions when inferring one's thoughts regarding that field
 E- Out of scope

7. It can most reasonably be inferred that the choice of children as the subjects of the psychology experiments discussed in the passage was advantageous to the experimenters for which one of the following reasons?
.
(A) Experiments involving children are more likely to give interesting results because children are more creative than adults.
 E - Out of scope

(B) Adults are more likely than children to give inaccurate reports of their thought processes.
 E - It's the reverse. "It seems that these children have the same thoughts that adults have regarding the phenomena but are much less capable of identifying these thoughts." (Para 1)

(C) Since adults are infallible in their access to their own thoughts, only the thought processes of children shed light on the nature of inference.
 E- Incorrect. The entire passage talks about the illusion of infallibility.

(D) Mental processes are sometimes easier to study in children because children are more likely than adults to make certain cognitive errors. 
 E- Correct

(E) Children are less experienced than adults in inferring the thoughts of others from observations of their behavior.
 E - Out of scope. The experiment is on own thoughts of children.

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Common sense suggests that we know our own thoughts directly, but that

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Common sense suggests that we know our own thoughts directly, but that

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards