PT111.S2.P3.Q17 > Analytics

Hide analysis

Philosophers of science have long been uneasy with biology, preferring instead to focus on physics. ███

Phenomenon · Philosophers of science prefer physics to biology

██ ███ █████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ █ ████████ ██ ████████████ ███████ ██ ████████ ██ ██ ███ █████ ██ ████ ██ ████ ██████████ ███ ███ ███ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████ ██ ██ ███████████ ███████ ████ █████████ █████ ██████ ████ ████████████ ███████████ █████ ████ ██ █████████ ████ ██ ████ ██ ██████████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ███████ ███ ██ ████████ ████████████ ██ ███████ ████ ████ ████ ██████████ ████ ███ ████ ████ █████████ ███ ████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ █████ ██ █████ ███ ███ ████ ██████████ ██ ███ █████████ ███ ████ ███ ██ ██ ████ █████████ █████ ██ ███ █████ ██████

Explanation · Because they mistrust uncertainty

Science is supposed to be about what is universally true. Hence, philosophers of science are interested in the fact that elephants and mice fall at the same rate but not why one is big and another small.

████████████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ████ █████ ██ ████████ ████ ███████ ████ ███████ ██ █████████ █████ ████ ████████████ ██████████ ████ ████ ███████ ██ ███ ███████ ████████████ ███████ ███ ███ ██████ ██████████ ███ █████ ██ ███████ ███████████ ████████████ █████ ███████ ██ █ ███ ██ █████████ █████ ██ ███████████ ███ ██████ ██ █ █████████ █████████ ███ ██████████ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ██ ██ █████████ ████ █████████ ███ ███ ███████ ██ █ ████████ █████████ █████ ████ ████ █████████ ██ ████ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ███ ██ ████████ ███

Biologists 1 · try to emulate physicists by asserting that laws of biology are universal too

E.g., all DNA evolves at a constant clocklike rate

Biologists 2 · question whether biology is universal

Perhaps historical contingency is necessarily a part of biology.

██ ██████████ ███ ██████████ ███████ ██████████ ████████ ██████████ █████████████ ████ ██ ████████████ ███████████ ███ █████ ███████ ████ ███ ██████████ ████████████ ████████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ██ ████████████ █████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ █████ ██████ ██ ██ █████████ ████████████ ████ ███████ ████ ██ █████████ ███ ████ █████ ███ ███████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ █████████ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ██ █████ ███████ ████ ████████ ██ ██████ ███ ████ ██ █████ ████ █████ ███████████ ███ █████ ██ █████████ ██████ ██ █ █████████ ███████████ ██ ███ ████ █████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ██ █ █████████████ ██████

Illustration of Disagreement · "All planets move in ellipses" v. "All swans are white."

"All planets move in ellipses" is a truly universal claim. Its truth depends only on the laws of physics and hence apply to all planets that exist or could exist.

Biologists 1 · Universal interpretation

These biologists (determinists) claim that "All swans are white" is also universal. Because the laws of natural selection guarantee that outcome.

Biologists 2 · Non-universal interpretation

These biologists (nondeterminists) disagree. They interpret the claim as a matter of historical contingency, not as a necessary truth.

███ ███████ ██ ████████████ ██████ ███ ████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ███████ █████ ███ █████ ██ ██████

Conclusion · History of evolutionary theory is the history of struggle between these two competing views

Passage Style

Critique or debate

17.

Which one of the following ██████████ █████ ███████ ██ ████ ██████████ ████ ███ ████ ████ ██ ███████████ ███████████ ██ ████ ████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ████████

The appearance of █ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ █ ███████████ ██ ██████████ █████████ ███ ██████████ ███████

Anti-supported. Determinists reject the idea that chance plays a significant role in evolution. This is clear with the example of the swans provided in P4.

The rate at █████ █████████████ ███████████████ ██ █ ███████ ██████ ██████████ ████ ██████████ ██ ███████████

Unsupported. We have no indication that determinists would believe this. For an Inference question like this, there should be text we can point to that establishes a relevant view of the author.

The causes of █ █████ ████████████ ██████████ ███ █████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██████████ ███████████

Unsupported. Biological determinists set out to explain evolutionary phenomena through universal laws, so they probably don’t think that the causes of these phenomena can never be understood.

The qualities that ██████ █ ███████ ████ ████ █████████ █████████ ██ ████ ███████ ████ ███ ███ ███ ████ ███████████

Unsupported. We have no indication that the determinists believe this. If anything, the example of the swans suggests that determinists would believe that an identified process––natural selection––defines species.

The chief physical ███████████████ ██ █ ███████ ███ ██████████ ████████████ ██ ███ ████ █████████ ███████ ██████████

This is clear from the example of the swans given in P4. Additionally, we know that the determinists think that biology is explained by universal laws.

92%

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

It takes about five minutes.

Take the free diagnostic

More free LSAT prep: Sample LSAT questions Full-length diagnostic & practice test All free LSAT resources

PrepTest 111 - Section 2 - Passage 3 - Question 17

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action

PrepTest 111 - Section 2 - Passage 3 - Question 17

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Want to know why the right answer is right?