PT140.S3.Q20 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

PASSAGE 2

Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

Taylor concludes that telepathy is possible between people with close psychic ties. He supports this by saying that the frequent ability of a close friend or family member to know what you're thinking or feeling can't be a coincidence.

Taylor concludes that telepathy is possible because it explains how people can sense their close friends’ and family members’ thoughts and feelings. However, he overlooks other possible— and far more probable— explanations. For example, maybe friends and relatives can sense each other’s thoughts because they spend a lot of time together and know each other very well, not because they’re telepathic.

We don’t know how many friends and relatives Taylor observed. But even if he only observed a few, his conclusion is that telepathy is possible, not that most or all friends and relatives are telepathic. To show that something is possible, Taylor only needs to observe it once.

A highly plausible alternative explanation for why friends and relatives can sense each other’s thoughts and feelings is simply that they spend time together and know each other well. Taylor fails to rule out this explanation, concluding instead that these people are telepathic.

Taylor talks about people’s thoughts and feelings, but his argument doesn’t rely on an appeal to emotion. He just notes that friends and relatives can sometimes sense each other’s emotions.

Taylor’s argument only addresses friends’ and relatives’ ability to sense each other’s thoughts and feelings. He doesn’t make any assumptions about strangers. Whether strangers can sometimes sense people’s thoughts and feelings has no impact on Taylor’s argument.

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of circular reasoning. Taylor doesn't make this mistake. One can accept his premise— that friends and relatives can often sense each other’s thoughts and feelings— without first accepting his conclusion— that telepathy is possible.

PrepTest 140 - Section 3 - Question 20

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action