Question 1
Question:
Which of the following best expresses the main idea of the passage?
Option Analysis:
(A) "Explanationism is a superior theory to predictionism."
The passage does not claim one is superior overall; rather, it contrasts their approaches.
(B) "Two very different ideas can both be used to successfully investigate scientific theories."
This choice captures the essence of the passage, which explains that both explanationism and predictionism offer distinct methods for confirming a theory. The passage shows that while both may be useful, they focus on different aspects—one emphasizes explanatory power and the other, predictive ability.
(C) "Copernicus’s model of the solar system was more accurate than Brahe’s due to explanationism."
This answer focuses narrowly on the historical example rather than the broader conceptual contrast.
(D) "One cannot posit a physical theory without predictive power or previous observations."
The passage does not assert that both predictive power and previous observations are always necessary to posit a theory.
(E) "A predictionist and an explanationist will always diverge on whether a scientific theory is correct."
The passage does not claim that the two perspectives are always in disagreement, just that they evaluate theories using different criteria.
Correct Answer for Question 1: (B)Question 2
Question:
Which of the following most accurately states the author’s reason for citing the Copernicus and Brahe models of the solar system?
Option Analysis:
(A) "It shows that a theory without predictive power can never be tested and verified."
The example is not about a lack of predictive power but rather the quality of the explanation.
(B) "It reveals that some theories can have more or less of an 'ad hoc' quality."
While the term “ad hoc” is mentioned, this option only captures a detail rather than the primary reason for the example.
(C) "It shows that two different theories can never yield the same predictions for future events."
This is incorrect, as the passage explicitly notes that both Copernicus’s and Brahe’s models could accurately predict future movements.
(D) "It is used to support the idea that a more complicated model will always fail to a simpler model."
The passage does not argue that simplicity always wins, but that a less ad hoc (or more thorough) explanation is preferable.
(E) "It provides an example of when a theory can correctly predict future events but not offer the best explanation."
This option directly reflects the point made: both models predict future events, but Copernicus’s model offers a superior explanation by avoiding ad hoc assumptions.
Correct Answer for Question 2: (E)Sajjad1994
Explanationism is the idea that prediction is, in itself, insufficient to confirm a theory. To adequately confirm a theory, according to an explanationist, is to see how well it describes events and phenomena that have already been observed. Stephen Brush, a staunch explanationist, would say that a correct prediction does not necessarily confirm the truth of a theory; it could be the case that a theory predicts something and yet does not provide the best explanation of it. Take, for example, the difference in the perspectives of Copernicus and Brahe on the solar system. Copernicus’s model of the solar system was heliocentric, positing that all of the planets revolved around the sun. Brahe’s theory stated that all of the planets revolved around the sun, except the earth, which was immobile, and that the sun actually revolved around the earth. Even if both accurately predicted future movements of the planets, it is easy to see how Copernicus’s theory has less of an “ad hoc” quality—and, of course, provides a superior explanation of the mechanisms of the solar system. It is certainly true that a theory can successfully predict a certain event, yet fail to provide an adequate explanation for why it happened, or perhaps even stumble on the prediction more by accident than by manner of understanding the mechanism behind the event.
A predictionist would argue that while a theory can provide a perfect explanation for something happening, a theory cannot be tested for understanding or explaining the underlying mechanism of a phenomenon unless it can also predict some event that confirms that exact mechanism at work. For instance, a physicist might study the formation of solids and posit that all solids will sink if they are placed in a liquid of the same element, because the solid is denser than the liquid. Given this premise, we discover that the physicist’s prediction is true, and even once he stages an experiment with ice and water, he will not be proven wrong, but rather will have discovered a unique property of solid water.
1. Which of the following best expresses the main idea of the passage?
(A) Explanationism is a superior theory to predictionism.
(B) Two very different ideas can both be used to successfully investigate scientific theories.
(C) Copernicus’s model of the solar system was more accurate than Brahe’s due to explanationism.
(D) One cannot posit a physical theory without predictive power or previous observations.
(E) A predictionist and an explanationist will always diverge on whether a scientific theory is correct.
2. Which of the following most accurately states the author’s reason for citing the Copernicus and Brahe models of the solar system?
(A) It shows that a theory without predictive power can never be tested and verified.
(B) It reveals that some theories can have more or less of an “ad hoc” quality.
(C) It shows that two different theories can never yield the same predictions for future events.
(D) It is used to support the idea that a more complicated model will always fail to a simpler model.
(E) It provides an example of when a theory can correctly predict future events but not offer the best explanation.
31 Jan 2025, 08:00
0%
(00:00) wrong 
