#24 - Specific Reference, Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[Luke Haqq]

Hi Niteesh!

This question stem directs us to the final sentence of Passage A: "But negative evidence rarely is either." In context, it's saying that "negative evidence rarely is [conclusive proof that something is false] either."

We're then asked for something from Passage B that would support this idea. Answer choice (B) mentions the initial failure of Newton’s laws to correctly predict Uranus’s orbit. The author of Passage A would take this as support that negative evidence rarely is conclusive proof that something is false. After that initial failure, Neptune was later discovered and Newton was saved. In other words, there was some negative evidence with respect to Newton's laws but these didn't end up being conclusive proof that those laws were false.

[miriamson07]

Hello,

I can see why B is the answer among the choices given. But what threw me off here is that the question stem asks “which one of the following results mentioned …” The question asks for “results” in particular. But the answer choices seem to be in different levels of being “results.” This is a bit hard to explain, but what I mean is: answer choice B rather gives the initial result of “i initial failure of Newton’s laws,” before the final result, which revealed that Newton’s laws (more or less) could successfully predict Uranus’ orbit.

I would interpret answer choice D as also being on this level of being an “initial result,” and answer choice E as the “final result.” My question is, is it OK for answer choices on the LSAT to take slightly different takes on what’s being asked for (in this case, the answer choices are slightly different versions of “results”)? I want to know what to be prepared for.

Please let me know if my question isn’t clear; I’ll try to explain my thoughts better. Thank you!

[Kubsoon1]

Hello,

I can see why B is the answer among the choices given. But what threw me off here is that the question stem asks “which one of the following results mentioned …” The question asks for “results” in particular. But the answer choices seem to be in different levels of being “results.” This is a bit hard to explain, but what I mean is: answer choice B rather gives the initial result of “i initial failure of Newton’s laws,” before the final result, which revealed that Newton’s laws (more or less) could successfully predict Uranus’ orbit.

I would interpret answer choice D as also being on this level of being an “initial result,” and answer choice E as the “final result.” My question is, is it OK for answer choices on the LSAT to take slightly different takes on what’s being asked for (in this case, the answer choices are slightly different versions of “results”)? I want to know what to be prepared for.

Please let me know if my question isn’t clear; I’ll try to explain my thoughts better. Thank you!

I totally get what you're saying It can be tricky when the answer choices seem to be at different stages of the argument or result. On the LSAT, it's pretty common for answers to take different perspectives, like the "initial result" vs. the "final result" you mentioned. What you need to do is focus on what the question is really asking usually, it's about the specific point the passage emphasizes, not necessarily the entire timeline of events. Just make sure you're picking the answer that directly answers the question, even if it's a step in the process. You'll get the hang of spotting those nuances

[Jeff Wren]

Hi miriamson,

In this question, the word "results" functions in a similar way to the word "events" or "situations," and it is completely fine (and even unsurprising) that these answers would be at different stages of the process.

The best approach is to just take each answer "as is" and ask yourself whether that answer (in and of itself) is the correct moment/event/result that corresponds to what is being described in Passage A. While you should consider what happens before and after each event for context, those earlier/later events should not be thought of as part of the answer).

The stages of the results/events in the answers need to be considered in reference to the stages of testing a theory hypothesis.

1. Have a hypothesis
2. Find evidence that appears to disprove hypothesis (negative evidence)
3. Change/update auxiliary assumption
4. Retest to see if the original negative evidence still holds true

For Answer B, this corresponds to step 2, the original negative evidence that later gets dismissed.
For Answer D, this corresponds to step 4, failing to find Vulcan was part of retesting their auxiliary assumptions

What this question is really testing is one's ability to identify the exact detail/specific example in Passage B that corresponds to the idea that negative evidence is rarely conclusive raised in Passage A. In other words, we want a piece of evidence that seems to disprove a theory (negative evidence) that turns out to not disprove the theory (i.e. is not conclusive) due to a mistaken auxiliary premise.

The initial failure predicting Uranus's orbit based on Newton's laws is evidence that appears to disprove Newton's laws at first, but turned out not to disprove Newton's laws once Neptune was discovered (the updated/corrected auxiliary premise).