PT113.S2.Q5 > Question

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21

PASSAGE 4

Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 2 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

No purely physical theory can explain consciousness. This is because physical theories can explain only why systems have certain physical structures and how these systems perform various functions.

How do we know that consciousness can’t be explained by explaining why a system has certain structures and performs certain functions? If it could, it would contradict the author’s conclusion that no strictly physical theory can explain consciousness.

Consequently, to guarantee the conclusion, he must assume that, if a theory can explain consciousness, it must be more than an explanation of physical structures and functions. (Contrapositive: if a theory is only an explanation of physical structures and functions, it can’t explain consciousness.)

This leaves open the possibility that consciousness is a physical phenomenon, so (A) doesn’t guarantee the conclusion.

The contrapositive is: if a theory is only an explanation of physical structures and functions, it can’t explain consciousness. So, if (B) is true, it guarantees the conclusion that consciousness can’t be explained by a strictly physical theory.

This is too weak to guarantee the conclusion. The author contends that consciousness cannot be explained by a strictly physical theory. But (C) would only establish that consciousness cannot currently be explained by a strictly physical theory.

This is going in the opposite direction from the conclusion, so it can’t be the right answer.

PrepTest 113 - Section 2 - Question 5

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action