PT114.S4.Q19 > Analytics

Hide analysis

Anders: Support The physical structure of the brain plays an important role in thinking. ██ ███████████ ██████████ █████████ █████████████████████ ████ ███ ████ █████████ █████ ██ ████ ██████ █████ ███ ███████ ██████████████████ ███████ █████ █████ ████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ██████

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

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

Anders argues that, because the physical structure of the brain plays an important role in thinking, researchers should model "thinking machines" on the physical structure of the brain.

Yang rejects this argument, using an analogy with flying machines. Yang points out that flying machines modeled on birds' structures have never worked, and aircraft that work have very different structures from birds. By analogy, Yang argues that thinking machines modeled on the brain's physical structure are likely to fail, and concludes that researchers would have more success focusing on the brain's function and ignoring its structure.

19.

In evaluating Yang's argument it █████ ██ ████ ███████ ██ ████ ███████

Question Type

Evaluate

Yang assumes that flying and thinking are similar enough for the analogy to work. If flying depends more on function, whereas thinking depends on structure, then Yang’s argument makes little sense. Yang also assumes that not "modeling" a machine on something else's structure means that researchers can completely ignore that structure. But if structure tells us relevant information about function, then studying structure would still be very important, even if the machine ends up using a different structure to fulfill the same function. More information on any of these points would be very useful in evaluating Yang's argument.

studies of the ████████ █████████ ██ █████ ████████ ███████████ ███████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ ████████ ████████

This is very relevant. If the answer is yes, then contrary to Yang's conclusion, researchers should continue to study brain structure to avoid missing out on crucial information. If the answer is no, then Yang's conclusion would be strengthened.

83%

researchers currently working ██ ████████ ████████ ████ ███ ████████ ██ ███████ ████ ██████ █████ ███ ███████ █████████

Irrelevant. We have no idea how the breakdown of thinking into common sense and factual knowledge connects to what we're interested in — the relationship between structure and function.

as much time ███ ████ █████ ██████ ██ ███████ █ ████████ ████████ ███████ ██ ███ ████ █████ ██ ██████████ ███ █████ ████████ ████████

The relative time researchers have spent on developing thinking machines versus flying machines doesn't help us determine whether those researchers should be focusing on structure or function.

researchers who specialize ██ ███ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ███ █████ █████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ████████ ████████

Knowing the specialization of some of the researchers currently engaged in this project doesn't help us determine whether Yang is right or wrong in saying what these researchers should be focusing on.

some flying machines ████ ████ ███ ███████ ███████ ██ █████ ██████ ██ ████

This doesn't help evaluate Yang's argument. Yang doesn’t claim that not being modeled on structure is sufficient for a machine to work, just that structure isn’t the right starting point for creating a flying machine or a thinking machine.

PrepTest 114 - Section 4 - Question 19

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Confirm action