- Mon Oct 20, 2025 7:59 pm
#121853
Hi flowerpower,
No, I wouldn't say that Answer C is wrong because science's role in human understanding is irrelevant to the passages.
It is in fact relevant to both passages. Passage A begins "There are two extreme views concerning the role
of science in human understanding" and then describes these two views, the reductionist view and the traditional view. The passage then applies these two views to the topic of paranormal phenomena. In this case, paranormal phenomena is an example of the broader topic of human understanding.
The author of Passage A, who is open minded about the possibility of paranormal phenomena, is closer to the traditional view.
Reductionists believe that "all knowledge can be reduced to science." The author of Passage B, being a skeptic of paranormal phenomena, would be considered a reductionist.
The reason Answer C is incorrect is that the author of Passage A would not reject this statement. Any views that people may have about the role of science in human understanding would not affect scientific facts. The author of Passage B is not using the traditional view to disprove scientific facts, instead the author is arguing that science cannot provide definitive facts on paranormal phenomena because paranormal phenomena may be "inaccessible to scientific investigation." As the author of Passage A states, "paranormal phenomena and the scientific
method may be complementary" rather than in opposition.
