Never accept anything as true that you do not clearly know to be so

Question

Aristotle RC 99 - Passage 99     
   Never accept anything as true that you do not clearly know to be so; that is, carefully avoid jumping to conclusions, and include nothing in judgments, other than what presents itself so clearly and distinctly to the spirit that you would never have any occasion to doubt it. Then, divide each of the difficulties being examined into as many parts as can be created and would be required to better resolve them. Order your thoughts, by starting with the simplest ideas, which are the easiest to comprehend, to advance little by little, by degrees, up to the most complex ideas, even believing that an order exists among those which do not naturally follow one another. And last, always make deductions so complete, and reviews so general, so as to be assured of omitting nothing.

When I was younger, I had studied a bit—in the field of philosophy, logic, and in the field of math, geometric analysis and algebra—the three arts or sciences that seemed as though they should contribute something to my methodological approach. But while examining these fields, I noticed that, in logic, syllogisms and the bulk of other logical theorems serve only to explain to others the things that one already knows, or even to speak without judgment of things that one doesn‘t know, rather than to teach others anything; and, although logic contains, in effect, many true and just precepts, there are yet among these so many others mixed in, which are superfluous or refutable, that it is almost sickening to separate one from the other.

As for geometric analysis and modern algebra, in addition to the fact that they don‘t treat anything except abstract ideas, which seem to be of no use whatsoever, geometry is always so restricted to the consideration of figures that it can‘t stretch the intellect without exhausting the imagination; and algebra subjects one to certain rules and numbers, so that it has become a confused and obscure art that troubles the spirit rather than a science that cultivates it.

All of this made me think that it was necessary to look for some other methodological approach which, comprising the advantages of these three, was at the same time exempt from their defaults. And, just as the multitude of laws often provides rationalization for vice, such that any State is better ruled if, having but a few vices, it closely monitors them, thus likewise, instead of following the great number of precepts which compose logic, I thought that I would have enough with the four preceding, as long as I made a firm and constant resolution never – not even once – to neglect my adherence to them.  
 1 
 C 
 Q1). According to the passage, the author gave up the study of logic. He did so for all of the following reasons EXCEPT:

A. he did not gain sufficient knowledge to impart his learning to others.
B. he was unable to separate valid logical theories from those which seemed invalid.
C. he could not understand the rational methodology upon which logic is based.
D. he did not learn anything new from his philosophical and analytical studies.
E. he found it very difficult to distinguish between accurate and superfluous precepts

2 
 B 
 Q2). According to the passage, which of the following statements are true about geometry?

I. Geometric analysis is not useful for a logical methodology.
II. Geometry focuses too narrowly on shapes and lines.
III. Geometry is largely visual, so comprehension requires both intellect and imagination.

A. II only
B. I and II
C. I, II, and III
D. III only
E. None of the above

3 
 B 
 Q3). The author would be LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?

A. Logic is an inappropriate field of research for young scholars.
B. A scholar should always treat the subject of his or her study in its entirety.
C. Orderly study is based on the principle that a whole is the sum of its parts.
D. Teaching is one of the motivations for studying abstract ideas and theories.
E. Geometric analysis almost entirely concerns itself with the treatment of abstract ideas

RC Butler 2021  -  Practice Two RC Questions Everyday.   
Passage # 208 Date: 26-May-2021
 This question is a part of RC Butler 2021 .  Click here for Details

Gmatsaiyan · Answer

Topic and Scope - The development of a particular method of thought. 
 Mapping the Passage 
¶1 discusses the four principles of thought: don‘t accept anything as true unless it‘s
known to be so, divide difficulties into individual parts that can be resolved, build
ideas from simplest to most complex and make deductions complete so that nothing is
left out.
¶s2 and 3 discuss the author‘s background and problems with logic.
¶4 discusses the author‘s problems with geometric analysis and algebra.
¶5 discusses the author‘s desire to find a new way of thinking and mentions four
principles of thought.

Gmatsaiyan · Answer

Answers and Explanations

1)  Remember that ―According to the passage...‖ will almost always signal a detail
question. Use your map to predict where the details will likely be. Go back to ¶s2
and 3 to review the author‘s reasons for abandoning logic. Three answer choices
are details in this first paragraph, but (C) isn‘t supported: There‘s no evidence that
the author didn‘t understand logic.
(A): Opposite. This follows from the author‘s argument that logic serves ―only to
explain to others the things that one already knows.‖
(B): Opposite. This is a paraphrase of the last lines in paragraph three.
(C): The correct answer
(D): Opposite. This also follows from the author‘s argument that logic only explains
what one already knows.
(E): Opposite. Same as D.

2)  Another detail question. Focus your work in this question on ¶4, where geometry is
discussed. First tackle RN II, which appears in three choices. The author argues
that geometry is ―so restricted to the consideration of figures‖ that it ends up being
limited. RN II paraphrases this, eliminate (D).RN I states that geometric analysis
isn‘t useful for logical analysis. The author argues that geometry not only deals too
much with figures, but also doesn‘t ―treat anything except abstract ideas, which
seem to be of no use whatsoever,‖ suggesting that it‘s not useful for logic. RN III,
however, contradicts the author‘s point that geometry stretches the intellect at the
expense of the imagination. (B) catches the legitimate statements.
(A): Opposite. As described above.
(B): The correct answer
(C): Opposite. As above.
(D): Opposite. As above.
(E): Opposite. As above.

3)  Since you have no information in the question to narrow your focus, you can be
reasonably sure that the right answer will be something with which the author
generally disagrees. The shortcomings of the old systems and the four precepts
make up the meat of the passage, so look for something that conflicts with the
author‘s negative view of traditional methods of thought and his positive view of his
own precepts. (B) does the latter. The second precept argues that difficulties
should be broken up into many small pieces that can be individually evaluated; (B)
argues that subjects should never be broken up. The author would clearly disagree.
(A): Opposite. This follows from the author‘s argument in ¶3 that logic isn‘t
particularly useful.
(B): The correct answer
(C): Opposite. This is simply the opposite of the correct answer choice. The author
would agree that it‘s possible to understand a big problem by breaking it
down in to smaller problems.
(D): Opposite. The author argues in ¶3 that logical theorems ―serve only to explain
to others the things that one already knows...‖ which suggests that the
author is concerned with teaching abstract ideas in addition to simply learning
them.
(E): This can be inferred from the passage.
Strategy Point:
In questions that ask you to find a statement with which author disagrees, it is
often much faster to find a choice that conflicts with the main points than to
eliminate the three choices with which he would agree.

soumya170293 · Answer

Could anyone please explain for the Q > 1 why is the answer C despite D having an extreme word "Anything" ? Thnaks in Advance .

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

Q1). According to the passage, the author gave up the study of logic. He did so for all of the following reasons EXCEPT:

Difficulty Level:   700

Explanation

Remember that ―According to the passage... will almost always signal a detail question. Use your map to predict where the details will likely be. Go back to PARA 2 and 3 to review the author‘s reasons for abandoning logic. Three answer choices are details in this first paragraph, but  (C)  isn't supported: There‘s no evidence that the author didn't understand logic.

(A):  Opposite.   This follows from the author‘s argument that logic serves ―only to explain to others the things that one already knows.

(B):  Opposite.   This is a paraphrase of the last lines in paragraph three.

(C): The correct answer

(D):  Opposite.     This also follows from the author‘s argument that logic only explains what one already knows.

(E):  Opposite.   Same as D.

Hope it helps

Mihiran · Answer

Q3). The author would be LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?
A. Logic is an inappropriate field of research for young scholars.
B. A scholar should always treat the subject of his or her study in its entirety.
C. Orderly study is based on the principle that a whole is the sum of its parts.
D. Teaching is one of the motivations for studying abstract ideas and theories.
E. Geometric analysis almost entirely concerns itself with the treatment of abstract ideas

Solution:
This is an inference question and the most difficult of the kind, that is find the one that can not be inferred. Here is my analysis, I don't know if its right though! Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

Last paragraph: "likewise, instead of following the great number of precepts which compose logic, I thought that I would have enough with the four preceding, as long as I made a firm and constant resolution never – not even once – to neglect my adherence to them."
The statement "instead of following the great number of precepts which compose logic, I thought that I would have enough with the four preceding..." basically means don't take everything of those subjects so answer is B). Also, in the first paragraph, the author talks about breaking everything down to small problems.

anvitadhankhar · Answer

can someone explain 3rd question

and why not d

egmat · Answer

anvitadhankhar

Question 3:

Looking at Question 3, I'll explain why  B  is the correct answer and address your specific doubt about option D.

Understanding the Question:

We need to find which statement the author would be  LEAST likely  to agree with - meaning we're looking for something that  contradicts  the author's views.

Why Answer B is Correct:
 
The author explicitly advocates for  breaking things down into parts . Look at his second methodological principle:
" divide each of the difficulties being examined into as many parts as can be created and would be required to better resolve them "

This directly  contradicts  option B, which says "A scholar should always treat the subject of his or her study in its entirety." The author believes in dividing and conquering, NOT treating subjects as indivisible wholes.

Why D is Incorrect (addressing your specific doubt):
 
Option D states: "Teaching is one of the motivations for studying abstract ideas and theories."

The author actually  supports  this view! When criticizing logic, he complains that syllogisms "serve only to explain to others the things that one already knows"  rather than to teach others anything . This shows he values teaching as a legitimate purpose - he's just disappointed that logic fails at it.
The key phrase is " rather than to teach others anything " - this implies teaching SHOULD be a goal of studying these fields.
 
Quick Check of Other Options: 
 
 A: The author doesn't say logic is inappropriate for young scholars 
 C: Aligns with his methodology of breaking down and building up 
 E: He explicitly states geometric analysis treats "abstract ideas"  
 
Key Takeaway:  In RC "LEAST likely to agree" questions, look for statements that  directly contradict  the author's explicitly stated views. Here, the author's methodology of "dividing difficulties into parts" directly opposes treating subjects "in their entirety."

Never accept anything as true that you do not clearly know to be so

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

Never accept anything as true that you do not clearly know to be so

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