adityadon
I guess correct answer should be E ..
B speaks about pschycologists doing experiment with rats . and E speaks in general about pschycologists .... Is this difference has caused OA to be B ?
Nope. I assume the difference between B and E has been rightly spotted by sheolokesh as quoted:
sheolokesh
Between B and E, I would go for B... E has a reverse of premises "Responsible psychologists always accept the possibility that new evidence will show that their theories are incorrect." ie, responsible Phycologists accepts possibility. But in E it states Phycologists who accepts possibility are responsible.. Its wrong..
This is based on deductive logic i.e. All X are Y...Inference Some Y are X. The reverse All Y are X need not be true unless X=Y
Specifically speaking, just because all responsible psychologists (RP) accept a certain fact
(possibility of theories being incorrect), the reverse i.e. all those who accept this fact are RP need not necessarily be true. Hence, eliminate E
Going ahead, before we mark B convincingly, take note of the premises. Ladlow assumes that just because his theory can draw accurate predictions, his theory is correct. This is flawed as there is no concrete reason to assume that
'accuracy in results' and
'correct' are linked. Maybe the sample population of rats used by Ladlow in his experiments are unrepresentative of traits of other rats in general and hence his results are skewed. Moreover,
accurate predictions is just a way to describe a trend of observations that are used to make up the experiment, and
to claim the correctness of his theory on the basis of a particular trend in observations is definitely not warranted. Maybe, the objective of the theory is to establish that there actually exists uncertainty as to how rats perform in a maze and the observed trend in results is actually doing the opposite!!!
Well I know I am kinda stretching this explanation too far This overall sentiment is rightly expressed by Anson and summed up in option B, which states that even if a psychologist draws accurate predictions (i.e. he presents a trend) the psycho cannot conclude that his theory cannot be disproved (i.e. the theory may not be correct in an absolute sense)