Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to

Question

Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to have been possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions. Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction. But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

(A) The social sciences do not have as much predictive power as the natural sciences.
(B) Mathematics plays a more important role in the natural sciences than it does in the social sciences.
(C) There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict.
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.
(E) Prediction is responsible for the success of the natural sciences.

souvik101990 · Accepted Answer

Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to have been possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions. Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction. But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

(A) The social sciences do not have as much predictive power as the natural sciences.  We dont know but may be psychology improves prediction power of social sciences into something better than that of natural sciences. SO cannot assume. 
(B) Mathematics plays a more important role in the natural sciences than it does in the social sciences. This might sound correct. But mathematics do not play any role in the fields themselves, but rather helps in prediction in those fields. Incorrect 
(C) There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict. This is wrong by the same logic that I wrote in 1 
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas. This is correct as social sciences contain data that is not easily mathematized 
(E) Prediction is responsible for the success of the natural sciences. We dont know whether natural sciences are successful. All we know is that prediction is possible there

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The correct answer choice is (D).

Like the previous problem, the conclusion is in the middle of the argument and is not prefaced by a conclusion indicator. Get used to seeing this format on Main Point questions! The author states that prediction has been made possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions and that some social scientists want to have this same power. The author argues that it would be a mistake to allow social scientists to have this ability. The conclusion, therefore, is “But this would be a mistake.”

Answer choice (A): The author says, “some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately,” so the author would likely agree with this statement. Regardless, this is not the main point of the argument. Again, be careful with answers that are true according to the author—do they also address the main point?

Answer choice (B): The author might very well agree with this statement, although there is not enough information to assert that this statement is true based on the stimulus (the words “more important” are a bit strong). Regardless, this answer choice does not address the main point of the argument and is therefore wrong.

Answer choice (C): While the social scientists may believe this is true, the author’s point is a different one—that social scientists ought not to perform a mathematical reduction. And, because the author believes that prediction is apparently made possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions, the author would likely disagree with this statement.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer. The conclusion states that it would be a mistake for social scientists to have the ability to reduce phenomena to mathematical expressions. Answer choice (D) is a paraphrase of that idea.

Answer choice (E): This point is not addressed in the stimulus.

Skientist · Answer

Rather than go through a POE, I think there is an easier method by looking at the question:

Which of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion? – Meaning: Locate the main conclusion in the argument and match to one of A-E.

So lets find the conclusion: 
Prediction, the hallmark..... a premise describing what prediction is (therefore very much factual)
Some social scientist...... further information on the preferences of social scientists. Another premise.
But this would be a mistake..... Bingo! This statement talks about what would happen in the hypothetical future if the aforementioned premises were followed. I like these kind of conclusions (ones which talk about what might happen in the future) because they are easily located by the mere fact they occur in a different ‘tense’ in the argument.

All you need to do now is read A – E and see which matches this conclusion. There is only one thats close: D

Hope that helps

B.

souvik101990 · Answer

Yeah that is whats the best option for conclusion/inference questions. However, I think its good to show how exactly the wrong answer choices are wrong so that you have a feeling of how gmat throws you off guard.

kinjiGC · Answer

@Souvik : I have no problem with D if it states that "For prediction to be possible,phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas. ", but don't you think the statement D may not be true in all the cases.

cssk · Answer

Between C and D, I chose C from the idea - Some social scientists also want the power to predict :roll:

I felt D is a bit extreme to conclude. Someone please explain why C is out. Thanks.

plumber250 · Answer

Hi CSSK,

to get this right, you really need to get what the meaning of 'conclusion' is. That is to say the result of what you are thinking at the end of the passage, with all info taken into account.

With C -it's not the CONCLUSION. It's more the starting point for the argument.

Hence why it is wrong

Hope that helps

James

gwu · Answer

D for me

Psg conclusion: But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena - saying don't do it, not the way to go.

D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.

BrainLab · Answer

Step 1: Find the Conclusion  
Conclusion:  But this would be a mistake ; WHY ? BECAUSE --> it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.

Step 2: Paraphrase the conlclusion  
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formula = But this would be a mistake WHICH refers to --> social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction

sa18 · Answer

Regarding D: But there can be some data that can be mathematized and some which cannot be. How can we generalize that every data cannot be mathematized?
And if some data can be mathematized then surely it can be reduced to mathematical formulas.

zvazviri · Answer

In identifying the conclusion of an argument, you go where the premises lead you even though they may not be factually correct in the real world. The conclusion is what the author concludes based on the premises he/she provided. It might be a weak conclusion, but in this question type, that's beside the point.

RohitSaluja · Answer

Maybe a bit late to the party but wanting and needing is not the same thing

Paras96 · Answer

The main conclusion of the argument is:

(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.

The argument argues against reducing social phenomena to mathematical expressions, suggesting that this approach would be a mistake and would only distort social phenomena. Therefore, the main conclusion is that social phenomena should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.

sayan640 · Answer

GMATNinja   KarishmaB   gmatknight  Could you please explain why option A is not correct here ?

KarishmaB · Answer

De-construct the argument:

Context:
Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to have been possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions. Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction.

Conclusion: But this would be a mistake;

Premise: it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.

The author wants to tell you that don't perform the same reduction on social phenomena. He doesn't talk about whether the reductions will lead to accurate predictions or not. He likely believes that there will not be accurate predictions (because some data will be neglected) but getting that message across is not his aim of this paragraph. Here he says don't perform this reduction and he tells you why - it will distort the social phenomena.

Hence answer is (D), not (A).

Sans8 · Answer

KarishmaB  
If option C was written as : There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict  ACCURATELY .
Then would it have been correct?
I am stuck between C and D

KarishmaB · Answer

No. The conclusion is not what we think makes sense but what the author has said. When I ask you the conclusion of someone's argument, I expect you to tell me in a few words what he wants to say. Just paraphrase what his message is.

The argument only says that some social scientists want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction. Then our author say, "But this would be a mistake."
So all he wants to say is "do not perform the same reductions on social phenomena" and he goes on to give his reasons for the same.

We should not try to read between the lines of the author. Does he actually mean this or that? No. We should read exactly what the author has written.

Mantrix · Answer

P1: Prediction in natural science appears to have been possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions.
P2: Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction.
Conclusion: But this would be a mistake, because, it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

(A) The social sciences do not have as much predictive power as the natural sciences. (Conclusion is just only social scientist can't use Math's as it will ignore some variable, but it's never said that social science doesn't have the predictive power, eliminate)
(B) Mathematics plays a more important role in the natural sciences than it does in the social sciences. (we have the info about the maths plays a important role in prediction of natural science than the social science, but we dont have any info regarding the roles in general, so eliminate) 
(C) There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict. (There's no argument about the need to have, eliminate)
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas. (yes, as it misses out some of the factors, so social science should not be reduced to math's formulas)
(E) Prediction is responsible for the success of the natural sciences. (success of natural science never mentioned, eliminate)

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to

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 Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to

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