Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardPoints of Disagreement

Read the following two passages regarding the methodological treatment of anomalous data in the physical sciences.

Passage A
In the practice of observational astronomy, the encounter with anomalous data—measurements that stubbornly refuse to align with the predictions of the prevailing theoretical framework—must be treated not as a minor nuisance, but as a mandate for immediate and rigorous theoretical re-evaluation. To dismiss such discrepancies as mere instrumental noise, or to intentionally relegate them to the margins of scientific inquiry, is to betray the fundamental empiricism of the discipline. When planetary orbits deviate even infinitesimally from calculated trajectories, it is precisely this deviation that often harbors the seed of the next theoretical revolution. The integrity of the scientific method demands that these known anomalies be placed at the center of astronomical discourse, forcing the current paradigm to either robustly account for them or yield to a more comprehensive framework. Tolerating confirmed anomalies without aggressive investigation breeds theoretical complacency.

Passage B
The history of physics and astronomy reveals a pragmatic truth: at any given moment, the dominant theoretical paradigm is swimming in a sea of anomalous data. If scientists were to halt their primary research programs to aggressively scrutinize every observational discrepancy, scientific progress would be completely paralyzed. Many anomalies are ultimately resolved not by grand theoretical revolutions, but by eventual improvements in instrumentation or by the identification of subtle, previously unmodeled background variables. Consequently, it is an entirely rational and methodologically sound practice for researchers to deliberately bracket or set aside minor anomalies, continuing to refine and apply the dominant theory in the interim. Only when an anomaly proves extraordinarily persistent, and fundamentally disrupts the core utility of the paradigm, does it warrant the concerted, immediate attention of the theoretical community.

Based on the passages, the authors would be most likely to disagree over whether:

  1. A
    the ultimate resolution of most astronomical anomalies requires the development of fundamentally new theoretical frameworks.
  2. B
    the prevailing theoretical paradigm should be discarded the moment it fails to perfectly predict a new observational measurement.
  3. it is methodologically defensible for researchers to temporarily set aside certain unexplained observational discrepancies in order to maintain scientific momentum.Answer
  4. D
    anomalous observational data primarily arises from subtle background variables that have not yet been mathematically modeled.
  5. E
    the fundamental empiricism of astronomy requires that scientists completely halt their primary research programs whenever an anomaly is detected.

Answer

The authors disagree on whether it is methodologically defensible for researchers to temporarily set aside certain unexplained observational discrepancies in order to maintain scientific momentum.
The correct answer accurately captures the core methodological conflict between the two passages. Passage A explicitly condemns the practice of setting anomalies aside, stating that to 'intentionally relegate them to the margins' is to 'betray the fundamental empiricism of the discipline.' Passage B explicitly defends this practice, arguing that it is 'an entirely rational and methodologically sound practice... to deliberately bracket or set aside minor anomalies' to avoid paralyzing scientific progress.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze Passage A to determine its core argument and tone regarding anomalous data.
Passage A argues that anomalous data must be aggressively and immediately investigated. The author believes that ignoring or setting aside anomalies ('relegating them to the margins') breeds complacency and betrays scientific empiricism.
Understanding the absolute, unyielding stance of Passage A is necessary to find a point where Passage B takes the opposing view.
2
Analyze Passage B to determine its core argument and tone regarding anomalous data.
Passage B argues from a pragmatic standpoint, stating that because anomalies are so common, it is rational and necessary to 'bracket or set aside' minor ones so that normal scientific progress can continue without paralysis.
Contrasting this pragmatic approach with Passage A's strict empiricism reveals the fundamental conflict between the two texts.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to identify a proposition that one author clearly affirms and the other clearly denies based on textual evidence.
Passage A denies that it is acceptable to set anomalies aside (calling it a betrayal of empiricism). Passage B affirms that it is acceptable and rational to set them aside to maintain progress.
This directly maps to the correct option, confirming it is a genuine point of disagreement.

Key Concept

Identifying genuine points of disagreement by distinguishing between normative claims about methodology and descriptive claims about facts.
Rate this question

Topics

Points of Disagreement

More questions from this topic