Although consciousness seems to arise from physical processes, physica

Question

Although consciousness seems to arise from physical processes, physical theories can explain only why physical systems have certain physical structures and how these systems perform various physical functions. Thus, no strictly physical theory can explain consciousness.

The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

(A) Physical theories can explain only physical phenomena.
(B) An explanation of consciousness must encompass more than an explanation of physical structures and functions.
(C) The physical structures and functions of consciousness are currently unknown.
(D) Consciousness arises from processes that are entirely explainable by physical theories.
(E) An explanation of physical structures and functions must be formulated in strictly physical terms.

Source : LSAT PrepTest 37

KrishnanTN · Answer

Initial Analysis - Consciousness seems to arse from PP. No Physical 'thing' can explain consciousness.

(A) Physical theories can explain only physical phenomena.
Okay.., but what can explain Consciousness - This does not answer. So REJECTED.

(B) An explanation of consciousness must encompass more than an explanation of physical structures and functions.
RIGHT ANSWER - If Physical theory can't explain Consciousness, there is something beyond Physical Theory that can explain. RIGHT ANSWER.

(C) The physical structures and functions of consciousness are currently unknown.
REJECTED. This statement couldbe right - but it does not give us a clue about why Physical thery can't explain consciousness.

(D) Consciousness arises from processes that are entirely explainable by physical theories.
REJECTED - This assumption directly contradicts the Conclusion.

(E) An explanation of physical structures and functions must be formulated in strictly physical terms.
Okay.., but how to explain Consciousness ? This assumption cant answer the question.
So, REJECTED -

Leehongnhung · Answer

A. Physical theories can explain only physical phenomena
=> So how about consciousness? Can we confirm that physical theory can explain consciousness or not? We don't know => Wrong.
B. This answer relates to the gap in reasoning. Thus, we can use Negation test to confirm.
 Negate B will be: "An explanation of consciousness MUST NOT encompass more than an explanation of physical structures and functions"
=> Meaning that Explanation of physical structures and functions are sufficient to explain consciousness, meaning that physical theory can explain consciousness -> It will break the argument. This is the correct answer. 
C. Irrelevant. It mixes information of physical structures and functions with consciousness => Wrong
D. Contradict to the argument => Wrong
E. Irrelevant. We don't care it should be formulated in physical term. It cannot explain anything whether physical theory can explain consciousness. => Wrong.

roVanG · Answer

A. Argument only talks about physical process, structure, function and theory. What exactly does phenomena refer to here is not clear - Incorrect

B. From the passage we know that  Physical theory can explain -> Structure + Function . But if in order to explain consciousness, you need more information other than structure and function, then a physical theory will never be able to explain it. Think about a Venn diagram where Structure and Function are sub-sets of Consciousness. - Correct

C. This is a tempting choice and was in my final 2, but the word "currently" makes this choice an incorrect assumption. So if we negative this statement, does it break the argument. NO. - Incorrect

D. This actually weakens the argument since it goes against the conclusion that physical theory can never explain consciousness. - Incorrect

E. While the statement may be true in general, but it does not fill the gap why physical theory cannot explain consciousness. - Incorrect

rockydx007 · Answer

Premise 1: Phy Process causes Consciousness.
Premise 2: Phy Theories partially explains phy functions/systems, which basically defines phy processes
Conclusion: No Phy theory can explain consciousness

Possible Assumptions: 
a. Phy theories are the only way we can define Physical process, which will, in turn, define Consciousness 
b. Since phy theories do not fully define Phy processes, we can not explain consciousness. Hence, we need more infor to define phy processes. -  option C states this.

Answer C

unraveled · Answer

Too many physical things.

Basically the passage treats physical processes and physical theories as separate. Only if there is no relation between the two it will be possible that physical theories don't explain consciousness. A and E are out of scope. C is inferential in nature thus can't be the answer. D complicates the situation rather, weakening the conclusion - need a strengthener that would help explain why such conclusion was made. B nicely explains the gap between the two and thus is the assumption required to be made. Answer B.

anushree01 · Answer

B nicely explains the gap between the two and thus is the assumption required to be made.

Answer B.

Although consciousness seems to arise from physical processes, physica

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

Although consciousness seems to arise from physical processes, physica

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