Self-study
P1
An effort should be made to dispel the misunderstandings that still prevent the much-needed synthesis and mutual supplementation of science and the humanities. ███
Problem ·
Misunderstandings prevent the synthesis of science and the humanities
The misunderstanding should be dispelled. Science and the humanities should be synthesized.
Solution ·
Not hard
Just need to clear up basic misunderstanding of the philosophical foundations of science and humanities.
P2
████ █████████ █████ ████████ ███████ ████ ██ ██████ ███████████ █████████████ █████ ███ ████ ███ ████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███████ ████ ████ ███████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ████████ █████████████ █████████ ███ ████████ ████ ████ ██████ ███ ████████ ██████ ███
Problem ·
Humanists misunderstand science
Humanists (mistakenly) view science as a mechanical reduction to "bodies in motion." That scientists are only interested in the material world.
Problem ·
Humanists are wrong
Author sees this as a "caricature" of science. Author implies that science does not ignore or explain away the most essential human values. That science can have something to say about morality, religion, and the arts.
P3
████ ███████████ ██ ███ █████ █████ █████ ████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███████ ████ ████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ██████████ ███
Problem ·
Scientists misunderstand humanities
Scientists (mistakenly) view humanities as only interested in emotion and sentiment. That humanities are useless because it serves no pragmatic purpose (contra science and technology). That morality, religion, and the arts are of secondary importance.
P4
████ █████ ███ ██████████████ █████ █████████ ███ ██████████ █████ ████ ███ ██ ████ ██ ███████████ ███
Problem ·
misconceptions on both sides
Author is reiterating the problem.
Solution ·
Scientific humanism
Two sides can be reconciled. Both try to understand and explain people and the world.
Solution ·
Synthesis
Scientific humanism combine what works from both: scientific methods and attitude plus interest in human values.
Solution ·
Obstacle
Ignorant view of each side.
Solution ·
Likelihood of Success
Possible and even probably if focus is on common objectives (understanding people and the world).
Passage Style
Critique or debate
Problem-analysis
11.
The passage suggests that the ██████ █████ █████████ ████ █████████ ██████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████████████ ██ █████ █████ ██ █████
a
a realization that ███ █████████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ██ ███████ ████ ██ ████████████ ████████████ ██████ ██ ███ ████████ █████
The author never indicates that scientists are less interested in “bodies in motion” than in constructing math models. So (A) doesn’t make sense as something the author would recommend humanists begin believing. “Bodies in motion” and math models are just two examples of things that humanists think scientists are focused on.
b
an acknowledgement that █████ ██ █ █████████ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ███████ ████ ███ ███████ ███
c
an acceptance of ███ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ █████ ██████
d
a less strident ██████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ████████ █████
We have no reason to think the author believes humanists are too “strident” (meaning, harsh or grating) in their claims. Also, we don’t know that humanists claim arts is of “primary importance” in life.
e
an emphasis on ██████████ ████ ███ ███████ ███ ███ ██████████ ███████ ███ █████████ ████████ ██ ███████
We have no reason to think the author would recommend humanists show the practical value of humanities. This is something