PT7.S1.Q24 - Many major scientific discoveries of the past

LSATcracker-1

Why not D? if (D) wasn't true and not all scientific investigators received a grant, then wouldn't that mean serendipity can play a role in scientific discovery? Since they would not have to make clear projections and disregard info not directly related to their research.

Admin note: edited title

AngusMcGillis

I think D is mostly wrong because the argument doesn't rest on people actually getting any grants, it's all hypothetical.

Grants require clear projections

---

investigators ignore anything not directly investigated

---

serendipity can no longer play a role

Also the conclusion says "under the prevailing circumstances"