Prevailing scholarly opinion holds that modern science began...

Hi GMATNinja, Answer D makes a lot of sense to me, but I haven't been able to understand why option A is wrong. I have read all the other posts concerning question 3, but I don't find their answers to my question very convincing.

Please explain Why B is wrong for Q1/

B is not a good choice because in this passage authour gives his opinion.

sectio1:
Prevailing scholarly opinion holds that modern science began with the great achievements of the scientific revolution of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. --scholar opinion
Modern science should not, however, be identified with any particular set of scientific achievements. Rather, modern science should be identified with a particular way of approaching the study of nature, and many important elements of this approach were already in place and articulated as early as the fourteenth century. --author opinion

section2:
Jean Buridan, a prominent fourteenth-century Parisian scholar, argued that science is predicated on the assumption of the “common course of nature” --scholar opinion
This profound assumption represented a major shift in scholarly focus from the theological investigation of the uncommon or miraculous to the attempted explanation of the regular structure and operation of the world in purely rational and secular terms. --author opinion

section3:
Buridan also advocated the application of Occam’s razor, the principle that science should seek the simplest possible explanation that fits the evidence. --scholar comments
The one important ingredient of modern science that was missing prior to the sixteenth century was the widespread use of experiments, and the scientific revolution of the sixteenth century began when scientists started to use experiments to discover new answers to questions that had already been pondered for several centuries.--author remarks

With this thought, it is very clear that there is no summary of scholar opinion

But this passage talks more of author opinion on scholar's comments/remarks

If you focus on section1 , it builds the theme of passage. Scholars say something but author doesn't agree with this . Section 2 and section3 explains more about this certain issue mentioned in section 1 (regarding began of modern science.)

You will find A among all other options most close to theme of this passage.

I hope it helps.

I did the same mistake last time in selecting A.
But after expert reply, i was clear why A is wrong.

Read again A

(A) The use of experiments is the crucial factor enabling scientists to engage in what can properly be described as modern science.
Green part is right
the problem is in the red part

want to think for a moment?

Ok welcome back. Hope you have thought yourself by now.
You can verify your thought now:

What is question:3. It can be inferred from the passage that the author would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements concerning modern science?
So we need to give author is most likely to agree?
1. the scientific revolution of the sixteenth century began when scientists started to use experiment--so it doesn't mean with experiments , it can be properly regarded as modern science.
2. modern science should be identified with a particular way of approaching the study of nature-- author doesn't believe experiments are called as modern science.

In summary, author says modern science means particular way of approaching the study of nature but not as experiments . Experiments were something missing links in modern science but not as modern science.

Its good that you have no doubt in D. I did wrong in my first attempt , so in that way you are much way ahead than me for this passage


I hope it helps.

EducationAisle please could you help me with Q3. (A) (C) and (D) totally confused. I went through the thread but wasn't convinced with the answers provided

Yeah..A and C are close..but according to the passage, it is just that the "use of experiments" (and not modern science itself) began in 16th century.

However, the author is of the opinion that modern science started much earlier (in 14th century); in 16th century, the only thing that happened was that an additional "component" (in the form of use of experiments) was added to Modern science.

But one of the key components of modern science is experiments right? So until and unless we don't have this key component how can we state that 14 C.E. was the period when Modern science began?

Posted from my mobile device

Well, the author says that modern science should be identified with a particular way of approaching the study of nature.

Further, the passage states that many important elements of this approach were already in place and articulated as early as the fourteenth century.

True. But many important elements were present without the key element. So can we infer that without the key element (experiments) modern science can't begin from a particular period?

Posted from my mobile device

Read A again Hoozan:

The use of experiments is the crucial factor enabling scientists to engage in what can properly be described as modern science.

The passage does not mention or allude anywhere that modern science was improper before the use of experiments. The use of experiments was just a crucial missing ingredient prior to the sixteenth century.

For all you know, many crucial ingredients have been added to modern science after the the sixteenth century also. Crucial ingredients getting successively added are all about evolution of modern science.

But what's being talked about in the passage, is the origin (and not the evolution) of modern science.

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.