Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
07 May 2023, 07:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Question 1
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
85%
(hard)
Question Stats:
31% (02:32) correct
69%
(02:56) wrong
based on 189
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Question 2
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
75% (01:47) correct 25%
(02:09) wrong
based on 166
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
While critics contend that the views expounded on in Against Method are tantamount to scientific anarchism, its author Paul Feyerabend maintains that his views stem not from a desire to promote scientific chaos so much as from a recognition that many of the fundamental tenets of science—rationality, empiricism, and objectivity, for example—are as seriously flawed as the “subjective” paths to truth that scientists are quick to repudiate. Feyerabend goes further by arguing that many methods that are now condemned in the scientific community played a critical role in historical moments of scientific progress. The fact that these methods helped science advance in the past indicates that scientists should think twice before they condemn them.
Much of Against Method is a case study of the events surrounding Galileo’s single-handed rejection of the geocentric cosmological model in favor of the updated heliocentric model. Feyerabend goes to lengths to point out that what ultimately allowed Galileo to succeed in convincing the Western world that the earth revolved around the sun (and not the other way around) was the use of methods most modern scientists would deem highly suspect. For example, in attempting to explain why the rotation of the earth did not cause a rock dropped from a tower to follow a curved, rather than a straight, path, Galileo relied on several as-yet unproven hypotheses about the laws of motion, essentially begging the question for his own position. Additionally, his published works display a rhetorical style that reads more like propaganda than like scholarly work. By showing that these methods were critical to a crucial scientific advancement, Feyerabend casts doubt on whether these “unscientific” practices really deserve the criticism they so often garner.
Much of Against Method is a case study of the events surrounding Galileo’s single-handed rejection of the geocentric cosmological model in favor of the updated heliocentric model. Feyerabend goes to lengths to point out that what ultimately allowed Galileo to succeed in convincing the Western world that the earth revolved around the sun (and not the other way around) was the use of methods most modern scientists would deem highly suspect. For example, in attempting to explain why the rotation of the earth did not cause a rock dropped from a tower to follow a curved, rather than a straight, path, Galileo relied on several as-yet unproven hypotheses about the laws of motion, essentially begging the question for his own position. Additionally, his published works display a rhetorical style that reads more like propaganda than like scholarly work. By showing that these methods were critical to a crucial scientific advancement, Feyerabend casts doubt on whether these “unscientific” practices really deserve the criticism they so often garner.
1. Replacement of the word repudiate (Highlighted) with which of the following words would results in the LEAST change in meaning in the passage?
(A) overrule
(B) embrace
(C) underscore
(D) decry
(E) debate
(A) overrule
(B) embrace
(C) underscore
(D) decry
(E) debate
2. The passage implies that Feyerabend makes use of a “case study” (Highlighted) primarily in order to:
(A) demonstrate that since a canonical example of scientific progress itself made use of practices now deemed unscientific, scientists ought to revise their account of what is and is not acceptable scientific practice
(B) show that Galileo, in his attempt to prove that a rock dropped from a tower followed a straight, not a curved path, was guilty of many of the same errors in reasoning that make science controversial today
(C) underscore the notion that if science wants to keep thinking of itself as a field that is open to “subjective,” as well as “objective,” paths to truth, it needs to adopt some of the techniques that were prevalent in Galileo’s time
(D) back up the claim that tautological reasoning is acceptable only when used in the service of supporting hypotheses that have yet to be proven
(E) demonstrate that any endeavor in the philosophy of science that uses examples from history to support its claims is ultimately doomed to failure
(A) demonstrate that since a canonical example of scientific progress itself made use of practices now deemed unscientific, scientists ought to revise their account of what is and is not acceptable scientific practice
(B) show that Galileo, in his attempt to prove that a rock dropped from a tower followed a straight, not a curved path, was guilty of many of the same errors in reasoning that make science controversial today
(C) underscore the notion that if science wants to keep thinking of itself as a field that is open to “subjective,” as well as “objective,” paths to truth, it needs to adopt some of the techniques that were prevalent in Galileo’s time
(D) back up the claim that tautological reasoning is acceptable only when used in the service of supporting hypotheses that have yet to be proven
(E) demonstrate that any endeavor in the philosophy of science that uses examples from history to support its claims is ultimately doomed to failure
RC Butler 2023 - Practice Two RC Passages Everyday.
Passage # 137 Date: 08-May-2023
This question is part of RC Butler 2023. Click here for Details
Passage # 137 Date: 08-May-2023
This question is part of RC Butler 2023. Click here for Details
Manhattan GRE 5lb.
06 Aug 2023, 07:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
mitul19
Official Explanation
1. Replacement of the word repudiate (Highlighted) with which of the following words would results in the LEAST change in meaning in the passage?
Explanation
The gist of this sentence is that while scientists condemn certain practices as flawed, the methods they themselves use are subject to many of the same flaws. The correct answer will be a word, synonymous with “repudiate,” that means to condemn or denounce. Choice (D), “decry,” is the right word.
Answer: D
Explanation
The gist of this sentence is that while scientists condemn certain practices as flawed, the methods they themselves use are subject to many of the same flaws. The correct answer will be a word, synonymous with “repudiate,” that means to condemn or denounce. Choice (D), “decry,” is the right word.
Answer: D
