OFFICIAL EXPLANATIONProject SC Butler: Day 204: Sentence Correction (SC2)
Quote:
The philosophical doctrine of Incompatibility posits an inherent irreconcilability among the doctrine of Determinism, which holds that each state of affairs is necessitated by the states of affairs that preceded it, and the existence of free will.
A) among the doctrine of Determinism, which holds that each state of affairs is necessitated by the states of affairs that preceded it, and the existence of free will
B) between the doctrine of Determinism, holding each state of affairs as necessitated by the states of affairs that preceded it, and free will existing
C) in the doctrine of Determinism, which holds the idea that each state of affairs is necessitated by the states of affairs preceding, and the existence of free will
D) between the doctrine of Determinism, which holds that each state of affairs is necessitated by the states of affairs preceding it, and the existence of free will
E) between the doctrine of Determinism, which holds that each state of affairs may be necessitated by the states of affairs preceding it, and free will existing
• Split #1 - irreconcilability exists between two things, not among or in them. Among is almost always used for more than two individual things.
To say that two things cannot be reconciled means that there is opposition
between, not
among or
in them.
Eliminate options A and C
Split #2 - avoid absurd meaningIn almost any context, this one included, irreconcilability means that two things are
1) in stark contradiction or disagreement, and
2) not likely to change anytime soon.
Option E mischaracterizes determinism by using the words "may be."
Determinism is dogmatic and complete.
But in option E, a state of affairs may (implied: or
might not) be determined by preexisting causes.
And if events might
not be determined, then perhaps human free will caused the events.
There is no more irreconcilability.
Eliminate option E
• Split #3 - existence of free will vs. free will existing. Avoid babble. The word "existence" in option D is a dedicated noun—the "regular" noun.
The word "existing" in option B is a gerund—a noun made out of a verb.
If at all possible, use the dedicated noun rather than the gerund.
Maintain parallelism.
The construction
between X and Y requires that X and Y be parallel.
But in this case, option B incorrectly compares
X = the
doctrine of determinismand
Y = free will existing.
We know Y
could be "the existence of free will," which fits better with "the doctrine of determinism."
The
existence of free will is more parallel with "the doctrine of determinism."
This part of option B is ludicrous and a poor use of "as":
→ (B)
holding each state of affairs
as necessitated by the states
"holding . .. as" . .. necessitated by the states
Eliminate option B
The best answer is DNOTES - OTHER ERRORS• redundancy or crappy writing
Option C states, "the doctrine of Determinism, which
holds the idea that each state"
This issue is not a dealbreaker, and it is very subtle.
We have already imbued the doctrine with more [human or conscious] agency than the doctrine contains.
The doctrine does not think.
Nonetheless it is standard to say that "a doctrine holds ABC."
We do not need "the idea." Compare to the other sentences.
• parallelism?
Because the dedicated noun "existence" is both preferred and exactly parallel to "doctrine" (both are abstract nouns), we choose "existence" over
existing.
Existing is a verb-like noun called a gerund.
In the idiom
Between X and Y, it's better not to have an X that is a regular abstract noun and another that is a gerund.
COMMENTSvarmashreekanth , welcome to SC Butler.
I am always glad to see both newcomers and veterans.
These answers are very good.
Once again, everyone: nice work.