Comments

• 1 Like

  Dkimvisionmaker11 Alum Member

  July 2020 78 karma

  which section is it?
• fcbzxl-1 Core Member

  July 2020 20 karma

  @Dkimvisionmaker11 said:
  which section is it?
  section 1. Thanks a lot
• 1 Like

  Dkimvisionmaker11 Alum Member

  July 2020 78 karma

  The first task is to figure out what the antecedent argument might have been. In the stimulus, the first claim is that the question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere is too imprecise; the stimulus gives a reason that supports this claim (“because we are not sure . . .”). The second claim is that we cannot define the term in more precise way because doing so would hinder us from finding and recognizing intelligent life elsewhere (“since it is likely . . .”). I think it’s best to imagine the antecedent argument as claiming that we should define the term “intelligent life” in more precise way in order to make the question whether intelligent life exist elsewhere is too imprecise. We can imagine this from the two claims made in the stimulus. The first claim concedes that the question is too imprecise, but the second claim denies that defining it in a more precise way is a good idea. The reason is that it would hinder us from doing what we wanted to do: finding and recognizing intelligent life. Hence, “counterproductive.” So (D) would be the right answer. Let me know if this makes sense.