PT1.S3.Q05 - To the Editor: In 1960, an astronomer proposed

Karlygash-1Karlygash-1 Alum Member
in Logical Reasoning 61 karma

Hi there,
Could anyone please help me to understand why answer C is correct.

Thank you

Comments

  • taschasptaschasp Alum Member Sage ⭐
    796 karma

    We're looking for an answer that, if true, would weaken Clay's argument.

    Clay says that there's no life on other planets, because we haven't detected any planets, and planets are required for there to be life. In other words his argument is:

    1. extraterrestrial life -> planets
    2. astronomers haven't detected planets
      THEREREFORE,
    3. extraterrestrial life

    The part where his argument goes wrong is that, from "astronomers haven't detected planets" he is implicitly concluding "planets". But astronomers not detecting planets is different from planets not existing.

    So C gets at this. If C is true, that means we don't currently have enough technology to detect planets outside our solar system, meaning that there could well be planets that we just haven't detected. So that assumed link falls flat. Given C, "astronomers haven't detected planets" definitely should not lead Clay to conclude that those planets don't exist--they might exist, since if they do, we just don't have the instruments necessary to observe them.

  • Kitty McMaster-1Kitty McMaster-1 Alum Member
    80 karma

    Why is A wrong?

Sign In or Register to comment.