When making a logical argument, it is essential to distinguish between

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Overview:

Question presents the student with a more abstract line of reasoning, in which the author of the passage makes the distinction between theory and fact. Theory is represented as “an idea or hypothesis,” while fact is shown to be “evidence or proof.” The author goes on to indicate that theory relies on fact for support, while fact can stand on its own. As the passage progresses, the author provides context to this discussion by explaining the place of theory and fact in making a logical argument: theory is valid if it has fact to back it up, but without fact theory can only be “speculation.” The question then asks the student to determine the answer choice that is implied by statements made in the passage. With this type of question, the student will definitely have to review the individual answer choices closely to locate the one that is correct. And as always with implication/inference questions, the student needs to be able to point back to the passage for the clear statement(s) of implication in order for the answer choice to be correct.

The Correct Answer:

E Answer choice (E) best expresses the implication made in the following statement: “Theory is not always unacceptable in a logical argument, but that theory must be based on comparable facts from similar situations or examples.” In other words, the author is implying that a theory is perfectly valid when making a logical argument, but the theory requires fact from an analogous scenario for it to have a solid place within the argument’s line of reasoning. Answer choice (E) is thus correct.

The Incorrect Answers:

A The author does imply that fact is valuable for supporting and developing theory in a logical argument, but the author does not imply a statement of opinion that fact is always more important and more valuable than theory. The author seems more focused on discussing the place of each in logical arguments and in considering the way that the two elements work together. From the author’s comments, it is possible to infer that theory developed by fact could be a very effective technique for making a logical argument. Claiming that fact is always more significant than theory assumes more than the passage implies, so it cannot be correct. Answer choice (A) may be eliminated.

B The author makes no statement about avoiding theory. In reality, the author suggests that theory supported by fact could be very valuable in making a logical argument. Answer choice (B) assumes too much, so it cannot be correct.

C The author indicates that theory void of fact (within a logical argument) “usually ends in a speculation.” This means that theory without fact does not present a strong argument, but this does not mean that all theory in a logical argument (with or without fact) is the same as speculation. Answer choice (C) takes the author’s words out of context, so it cannot be correct.

D The author does claim that “it is essential to distinguish between theory and fact.” It cannot be inferred from this, however, that confusing theory with fact could lead to a logical argument that is entirely false. In reality, the author suggests that this could lead to a faulty or weak argument, but the author does not go to the extreme of the answer choice. As a result, answer choice (D) should be eliminated.