Historian: Because medieval epistemology (theory of knowledge) is a

Question

Historian: Because medieval epistemology (theory of knowledge) is a complex subject, intellectual historians have, until recently, failed to produce a definition that would help to determine what should and what should not be included in it. Clearly, the solution is to define medieval epistemology simply as "the epistemological beliefs of the medieval epistemologists." That way, if we want to know whether medieval epistemology includes some epistemological claim, we just ask whether any medieval epistemologists believed it. If any did, it is part of medieval epistemology: if any medieval epistemologists believed the opposite, then that opposite claim is part of medieval epistemology.

Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the historian's argument?

(A) Medieval epistemologists held some of the same epistemological beliefs as did ancient epistemologists.

(B) The epistemological beliefs of medieval epistemologists depended upon their beliefs about nonepistemological matters.

(C) The writings of most medieval epistemologists include passages that are clearly not about epistemology.

(D) Some medieval epistemologists had epistemological beliefs that contradicted the epistemological beliefs of other medieval epistemologists.

(E) There is much debate as to which medieval thinkers, if any, were epistemologists.

guddo · Answer

Historian: Because medieval epistemology (theory of knowledge) is a complex subject, intellectual historians have, until recently, failed to produce a definition that would help to determine what should and what should not be included in it. Clearly, the solution is to define medieval epistemology simply as "the epistemological beliefs of the medieval epistemologists." That way, if we want to know whether medieval epistemology includes some epistemological claim, we just ask whether any medieval epistemologists believed it. If any did, it is part of medieval epistemology: if any medieval epistemologists believed the opposite, then that opposite claim is part of medieval epistemology.
 
 Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the historian's argument?

The historian proposes a definition: medieval epistemology means the beliefs of medieval epistemologists.  The problem  is that this definition works only if we can first identify who the medieval epistemologists were. If that group is unclear, then the definition becomes  circular and unhelpful .

(A) Medieval epistemologists held some of the same epistemological beliefs as did ancient epistemologists.

This does not weaken the argument. A belief can belong to medieval epistemology even if ancient epistemologists also believed it.

(B) The epistemological beliefs of medieval epistemologists depended upon their beliefs about nonepistemological matters.

This does not weaken the definition. Even if those beliefs depended on other beliefs, they could still be epistemological beliefs held by medieval epistemologists.

(C) The writings of most medieval epistemologists include passages that are clearly not about epistemology.

This is irrelevant. The historian’s definition includes only their epistemological beliefs, not everything they wrote.

(D) Some medieval epistemologists had epistemological beliefs that contradicted the epistemological beliefs of other medieval epistemologists.

This does not weaken the argument. The historian directly allows this: if some believed a claim and others believed the opposite, both claims are included.

(E) There is much debate as to which medieval thinkers, if any, were epistemologists.

This is correct. The historian’s definition depends on knowing who counts as a medieval epistemologist. If that itself is debated, then the definition does not clearly tell us what belongs in medieval epistemology.

Answer: (E)

Tinytrotter · Answer

To eliminate Option (D) properly, the passage should be more clear on what happens when conflicting opinions of epistemologists are provided. Because a plain cursory reading does not indicate that both views will be included - rather it leads us to believe that the contrarian opinions will be included.

I agree (E) is a better answer because with (E), the whole argument falls apart but (D) is a close second and passage should clarify better.

I agree (E) is a better answer because with (E), the whole argument falls apart but (D) is a close second and passage should clarify better.

yc168 · Answer

Interesting observation. Thanks for sharing.

Anandanwar · Answer

Hello,

Choice E: There is much debate...
Having debate does not tell us whether that debate will be resolved sooner or later. The debate may be resolved tmrw. It just tells us that we need to resolve the debate and then qualify the claims with respect to the beliefs of the agreed upon epistemologists.
This did not seem to be a weakener to me. Just some additional info.

Choice D: When we read the last part of the argument: "If any did, it is part of medieval epistemology: if any medieval epistemologists believed the opposite, then that opposite claim is part of medieval epistemology"
Here the flaw is that the epistemologists may have contradictory beliefs, leading to the same confusion stated in the argument. 
Choice D hit this part perfectly.

Could someone point to the error in the above reasoning?
Regards,
Ankit

KarishmaB · Answer

The problem:  Because ME is a complex subject, intellectual historians have, until recently, failed to produce a definition that would help to determine what should and what should not be included in it.

Author's solution: define medieval epistemology simply as "the epistemological beliefs of the medieval epistemologists" (and then we will be clear what is ME what is not)

But what if there is confusion regarding who was epistemologist who wasn't, then this solution does not provide any clarity. We still don't know what is included what is not included in ME. We have just moved the problem to a different point. Without clarity on who should be considered medieval epistemologist and who should not, this definition doesn't provide as with what should be ME and what should not. 
If there is confusion on who should be considered medieval epistemologist and who should not, it cannot be resolved simply. It means the current knowledge is unable to clearly identify medieval epistemologists. How will it be decided int he future, nobody knows.

So (E) is the answer.

As for (D), we are not given that two opposite views cannot be a part of ME. ME is apparently "theory of knowledge." Within that theory, two opposite views may co-exist if two epistemologists have those views. All we want to know is how to define what is a part of that theory and what is not.

GMATcracker101 · Answer

Heart of the Historians' argument:  If any did, it is part of medieval epistemology: if any medieval epistemologists believed the opposite, then that opposite claim is part of medieval epistemology.

Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the historian's argument?

(A) Medieval epistemologists held some of the same epistemological beliefs as did ancient epistemologists.  INCORRECT. Irrelevant to the argument; if they did, then the same is part of medieval epistemology.

(B) The epistemological beliefs of medieval epistemologists depended upon their beliefs about nonepistemological matters.  INCORRECT. A parallel fact does nothing to weaken the argument, even if they depended upon their other beliefs, as long as any medieval epistemologists believed it; it is medieval epistemology.

(C) The writings of most medieval epistemologists include passages that are clearly not about epistemology.  INCORRECT. Passage says -  That way, if we want to know whether medieval epistemology includes some epistemological claim, we just ask whether any medieval epistemologists believed it.  As long as the medieval epistemologists believed it, it is enough.

(D) Some medieval epistemologists had epistemological beliefs that contradicted the epistemological beliefs of other medieval epistemologists.  INCORRECT. As the passage mentions 'any' and not all or most. As long as any medieval epistemologists believed.

(E) There is much debate as to which medieval thinkers, if any, were epistemologists.  CORRECT. If we are not sure that there were in fact any medieval epistemologists, then the argument falls apart; without any medieval epistemologists, the method fails, and hence we cannot define medieval epistemology.

egmat · Answer

Hi Anandanwar,

You're doing exactly the right thing by pressure-testing both choices, so let's take them one at a time.

Why D doesn't weaken

Look at the historian's own last line:  "if any medieval epistemologists believed the opposite, then that opposite claim is part of medieval epistemology."  The historian  has already told us what happens when they disagree  - both the claim and its opposite get counted in. Contradiction isn't a bug the historian overlooked; it's a feature the historian deliberately built in.

So when D says "some had beliefs that contradicted others," it's just restating a situation the argument  welcomes . A choice can only weaken if it breaks something the argument depends on. D breaks nothing - it describes the exact case the definition was designed to swallow. That's why it's not a weakener, even though on a quick read it  feels  like the flaw.

Why E weakens - and why "the debate could be resolved" misses it

The historian's whole test is:  "we just ask whether any medieval epistemologists believed it."  That test can only run if we  already know who the medieval epistemologists are . E says we don't - there's debate over  which thinkers, if any,  even were epistemologists.

Here's the key point your objection skips: the definition was offered as the  solution  to "what should and should not be included in medieval epistemology." But E shows it just swaps one unanswered question for an equally unanswered one - instead of "what counts as medieval epistemology?" we now must answer "who counts as a medieval epistemologist?" The definition doesn't  do its job  of helping us classify; it's circular.

Whether that debate gets resolved tomorrow is beside the point. As offered, the definition  doesn't resolve the classification problem it promised to resolve  - it leans on an unsettled group to define an unsettled field.

A simpler stand-in

Imagine I define  good movies  as "the movies liked by good film critics." If we can't agree who the good critics are, my definition hasn't helped you decide what a good movie is - I've just relabeled the problem. That's precisely what E exposes here.

Answer: E

Historian: Because medieval epistemology (theory of knowledge) is a

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

Historian: Because medieval epistemology (theory of knowledge) is a

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