Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardGeneral Method of Reasoning

Medical Researcher: Traditionally, the sudden drop in blood pressure following the administration of the medication Vasotensin was attributed to its rapid absorption into the bloodstream. However, a recent clinical trial delivered Vasotensin in a capsule that purposefully delayed its absorption by several hours. Patients in this trial exhibited the exact same sudden drop in blood pressure immediately upon swallowing the capsule. This demonstrates that the initial physiological response is triggered by receptors in the digestive tract, not by the medication's presence in the bloodstream.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the method of reasoning used in the medical researcher's argument?

  1. A
    Refuting a causal claim by demonstrating that two phenomena traditionally believed to have a cause-and-effect relationship are merely correlated.
  2. B
    Attempting to cast doubt on an experimental finding by questioning the methodological integrity of deliberately delaying the medication's absorption.
  3. Challenging a previously accepted causal explanation by describing a scenario in which the purported effect occurs in the absence of the purported cause, and advancing an alternative hypothesis.Answer
  4. D
    Rejecting a general scientific principle by demonstrating that the empirical evidence originally supporting it was derived from an unrepresentative sample.
  5. E
    Relying on a widely accepted medical consensus regarding a medication's effects as a foundational premise to establish a specific physiological mechanism.

Answer

The correct answer is the option that describes challenging a previously accepted causal explanation by describing a scenario in which the purported effect occurs in the absence of the purported cause, and advancing an alternative hypothesis.
The correct option perfectly captures the two-part rhetorical strategy used by the medical researcher. First, the researcher dismantles the traditional causal explanation by providing a counter-instance (the recent clinical trial) where the purported effect (blood pressure drop) occurs even though the purported cause (rapid absorption) has been intentionally delayed or removed. Second, having created a causal vacuum, the researcher explicitly advances a new alternative hypothesis (receptors in the digestive tract).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the medical researcher's argument.
The conclusion is the final sentence: 'This demonstrates that the initial physiological response is triggered by receptors in the digestive tract, not by the medication's presence in the bloodstream.'
Understanding the core claim is necessary to analyze how the author builds their case.
2
Identify the premises and evidence used to support the conclusion.
The author introduces a traditional causal view (rapid absorption causes the blood pressure drop) and contrasts it with a new trial where absorption was delayed but the drop still occurred immediately.
The method of reasoning is defined by the relationship between the premises and the conclusion.
3
Abstract the logical relationship between the evidence and the conclusion.
The author disproves an old cause by showing an instance where the effect happens without it, which creates a gap that the author fills with a new proposed cause.
Method of reasoning questions require translating the specific subject matter into abstract logical descriptions.
4
Evaluate the options against this abstract structure.
The correct option perfectly mirrors this by stating the author challenges a causal explanation, shows the effect without the cause, and advances an alternative hypothesis.
Matching the abstracted argument structure to the choices ensures accuracy and helps eliminate distractors that mischaracterize the flow of logic.

Key Concept

General Method of Reasoning
Estimated Time:1m 45s
Rate this question

Topics

General Method of Reasoning

More questions from this topic