Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: Çok zorPerspective of Mentioned Groups

While contemporary morphogenetic field theorists argue that embryonic development is governed by systemic, physical forces operating across tissues—rejecting the idea that development is merely a sequence of isolated, localized chemical reactions—they do not share the metaphysical commitments of early twentieth-century Neo-Vitalists. The Neo-Vitalists accurately diagnosed the inability of strictly mechanistic, localized models to explain 'embryonic regulation,' such as how an embryo bisected at an early stage can still develop into a perfectly proportioned, albeit smaller, organism. However, to account for this systemic regulation, Neo-Vitalists posited the existence of an 'entelechy'—an immaterial, non-spatial agency that directs cellular processes toward a predetermined adult form. Field theorists, by contrast, maintain that whole-organism regulation is an entirely physical phenomenon, emerging from complex, distributed topographical gradients.

Based on the passage, the early twentieth-century Neo-Vitalists would be most likely to respond to the morphogenetic field theorists’ explanation of embryonic regulation by arguing that:

  1. A
    the concept of an immaterial, non-spatial agency is ultimately unnecessary if embryonic development is understood as emerging from physical forces operating systemically across tissues.
  2. B
    any scientific model that relies on physical phenomena to describe cellular processes is entirely fabricated and fundamentally incapable of making accurate biological predictions.
  3. systemic, physical topographical gradients, because they are ultimately material in nature, cannot fully account for the directedness of an organism's development toward a predetermined form.Cevap
  4. D
    the complex, distributed topographical gradients proposed by field theorists are actually the primary mechanism through which the immaterial entelechy interacts with localized chemical reactions.
  5. E
    the ability of a bisected embryo to develop into a perfectly proportioned organism provides definitive proof that localized chemical reactions, rather than systemic forces, govern embryonic development.

Cevap

The correct answer states that systemic, physical topographical gradients, because they are ultimately material in nature, cannot fully account for the directedness of an organism's development toward a predetermined form.
The correct answer accurately synthesizes the Neo-Vitalists' core philosophical commitment with their likely evaluation of a competing theory. The passage states that Neo-Vitalists believed an 'immaterial, non-spatial agency' (entelechy) was necessary to explain how cellular processes are directed toward a 'predetermined adult form.' The morphogenetic field theorists, conversely, assert that such regulation is an 'entirely physical phenomenon' resulting from gradients. Because the field theorists' gradients are purely physical/material, the Neo-Vitalists—who fundamentally believe a non-physical agency is required for this specific task—would necessarily argue that the gradients alone are insufficient to account for directed development.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the Neo-Vitalists' core perspective as defined in the passage.
Neo-Vitalists rejected strictly mechanistic/localized models because they couldn't explain 'embryonic regulation' (e.g., a bisected embryo forming a whole organism). To explain this, they insisted on an 'entelechy'—specifically defined as an 'immaterial, non-spatial agency'.
Understanding the foundation of the group's belief is necessary to predict how they would react to new information.
2
Analyze the morphogenetic field theorists' explanation as defined in the passage.
Field theorists explain embryonic regulation using 'systemic, physical forces' and 'complex, distributed topographical gradients.' Crucially, they maintain this is an 'entirely physical phenomenon.'
We must understand the specific premise the Neo-Vitalists are being asked to respond to.
3
Evaluate how the Neo-Vitalists' core premise intersects with the field theorists' explanation.
The field theorists offer a physical solution (gradients) to the exact problem (regulation) that Neo-Vitalists believed required an immaterial solution (entelechy).
This intersection points to the fundamental disagreement between the two camps.
4
Predict the Neo-Vitalist response and match it to the options.
Because Neo-Vitalists are committed to an 'immaterial' cause for predetermined form, they would reject the field theorists' 'entirely physical' gradients as a complete explanation. This logically matches the correct option.
Deductive reasoning from the passage's explicit constraints yields the only defensible inference.

Anahtar Kavram

Inferring the perspective of a mentioned group by applying their fundamental philosophical or theoretical commitments to a novel proposition presented in the text.
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Perspective of Mentioned Groups

Bu konudan daha fazla soru