Self-study
Pulford: Scientists who study the remains of ancient historical figures to learn about their health history need to first ask themselves if their investigation is a legitimate scientific inquiry or is motivated by mere curiosity. ██ █████████████ ████ █ ███████ ██████ ████ ██ ██████ ███████ ██ █████████ ████ ██ ██ ██ ████ ███ ███ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ██████████
███████ ███ ██████ ████ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ██████████ ████████ ████ █████ ██████████ ███████████ ████ █████████ ██ █████████ ██████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Pulford concludes that scientists who study the remains of ancient people to learn about their health history should ask whether their investigation is motivated by legitimate science or is motivated by curiosity. This is because Pulford believe that investigations into health history of historical figures can be justified only if it’s done for the purpose of advancing scientific knowledge.
Varela points out that curiosity is the root of scientific inquiry, and that many great scientific discovered were motivated by only curiosity. (The implicit conclusion is that investigations into the healthy history of historical figures, even if motivated by mere curiosity, can still be a legitimate scientific inquiry.)
Describe Method of Reasoning
Varela questions a distinction Pulford drew between a study motivated by legitimate science and a study motivated only by curiosity.
20.
Varela responds to Pulford's argument ██
a
contending that Pulford's ████████ █████ ██ ██ █████████ ███████████
Varela points out that curiosity is the root of scientific inquiry. This blurs the distinction between a study motivated by scientific inquiry adn a study motivated by curiosity.
b
disputing the validity ██ █ █████████ ████ ███████ ██████████ ██████
The principle Pulford states is that investigations into individuals’ health is justified only if it’s for the advancement of science. Varela doesn’t dispute this principle. He broadens the scope of “for the advancement of science” to include studies motivated by curiosity.
c
offering a counterexample ██ █ ██████████████ ██ █████████ ██████████
Varela doesn’t bring up a counterexample. He doesn’t bring up a scientist who doesn’t need to ask whether their investigation is a legitimate scientific inquiry or is motivated by curiosity.
d
attempting to draw █ ███████████ ███████ ███ █████ ████ ███████ ██████ ██ █ ██████ ████
Pulford brings up his own view that scientists need to ask themselves about the purpose of their study into historical figures’ health. This does not combine two views. And Varela does not try to draw a distinction; he tries to collapse a distinction made by Pulford.
e
maintaining that Pulford's ████████ ██ █████ ██ ████████████ ████████
Varela does not assert that Pulford’s premises contradict each other. He interprets a distinction made by Pulford (between studies motivated by science and those motivated by curiosity) in a way that suggests the distinction is blurred.