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.
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.
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.
Possible and even probably if focus is on common objectives (understanding people and the world).
Passage Style
Critique or debate
Problem-analysis
6.
Which one of the following ████ █████████ ███ ████ ████ ██ ███ ████████
Question Type
Main point
The author advocates “scientific humanism” as a solution to the impasse between science and humanities. If both sides try to understand the similarities between them, science and humanities can be synthesized.
This is too one-sided. The author doesn’t blame the scientists. She puts both sides at fault. (A) also doesn’t capture the author’s advocacy of a combination of science and humanities.
b
The materialism of ███████ ███ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████ ████ ████ ██████████ ██ ██████ ████████
This doesn’t capture the author’s advocacy of a combination of science and humanities to solve the problem of the misunderstandings each side has of the other.
c
Technological development will █████ ██ ███████ ███ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████ ████ ████ ██████
The author never suggests that technological development will completely stop if science and humanities can’t combine. In any case, this doesn’t capture the author’s advocacy of a combination of science and humanities.
d
The current relationship ███████ ███████ ███ ███ ██████████ ██ ████ ███████████ ████ █████ ████████████ ████ ████
The author never suggests and science and humanities had a better relationship in the past. In any case, this doesn’t capture the author’s advocacy of a combination of science and humanities.
e
A synthesis of ███████ ███ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███ ████████████
This best captures the author’s point, which is that In any case, which is that science and humanities should combine into something called “scientific humanism.”
Difficulty
98% of people who answer get this correct
This is a low-difficulty question.
It is somewhat easier than other questions in this passage.
CURVE
Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right
25%123
131
75%139
Analysis
Main point
Critique or debate
Humanities
Problem-analysis
Answer Popularity
PopularityAvg. score
a
1%
151
b
1%
151
c
0%
151
d
0%
156
e
98%
164
Question history
You don't have any history with this question.. yet!
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.