Subscription pricing
Conclusion: It is premature to conclude that telepathy is an alternative means of communication.
Can anyone explain why (A) is the answer? In what part of the premise does the author points to "the inadequacy of evidence for the opposite view?"
Admin note: edited title.
0
2 comments
I got stuck eliminating D and E. Can someone explain why those are wrong?
Summary
Other people believe
Premise: there is research supporting the existence of telepathy.
Conclusion: there must be something to telepathy that is real.
Author
Premise: This phenomena can be explained and corroborated by natural laws too.
Conclusion: It is premature to conclude that telepathy is an alternative means of communication.
The author is doing something that you will see dressed up again well over 30 times working through PTs and in this example it's implicit. Just because someone has some evidence for their view does not mean it can be taken as conclusive evidence it is true. We see this all the time in daily life as well. Some new drug company makes a drug and has some evidence it is safe and concludes it is, then it actually ends up not being the case. The author uses a premise that shows there is an alternate explanation. Logically, if two ideas or theoretical contentions are at issue, it would not be valid to pick a side an conclude one is better then the other only by knowing they are opposite. The author says exactly this in his conclusion, "it is premature to conclude."
"It's premature to conclude." Why does the author say this? He said so because he found other evidence that creates tension with what other people use as a premise to support their conclusion.
Back to the analogy I said before, if one testing facility said the drug is safe and another said it was not. Both have equal merit. What can be concluded? You don't know which one is right but you surely know, "it is premature to conclude" anything.
Hope this helps.