Q23 - The reasoning in the argument

[tzyc]

Could anyone explain the answer is (D) instead of (C)?
I'm confused by the abstruct languages...

Thank you

[sumukh09]

The major difference between C) and D) is that C) says the hypothesis is "confirmed" whereas D is less committing and says "partially confirmed." We want an answer choice that is not too strong with respect to the evaluation of the hypothesis since in the argument the conclusion says there is only "some confirmation for the parasitic-connection hypothesis." Also, the argument does not say nor infer that the hypothesis could only be proven if the spiny anteater's brain was analyzed. C says that we could not derive a partial confirmation without the study of the ant eater which is not suggested in the argument.

Further, D is correct because it aligns well with the core of the argument which is the last sentence of the stimulus.

[deedubbew]

"partially confirmed" gives it away. but how do we know for sure that there is an "otherwise unexplained set of facts?"

[ohthatpatrick]

To answer the previous poster's question, "an otherwise unexplained set of facts" is meant to match up with the idea that the spiny anteater "has a very large brain relative to the animal's size". The fact that the spiny anteater is "anomalous", means that it is somehow special/deviant/different, therefore demanding of an explanation.

Since no other explanation is provided for why the anteater's brain is disproportionately large, we can call it "an otherwise unexplained set of facts".

(You're probably thinking, "How do we know there isn't some OTHER explanation for why its brain is so large?" There might be, but it would still be accurate to say that within this paragraph that the anteater's unusually large brain is unexplained otherwise)

=== whole question ===
In any Principle Support/Conform question, the correct answer normally connects language from the premise to language from the conclusion.

So let's sort out the core:

Conc:
The fact that the anteater, which doesn't dream, has an unusually large brain provides some support for the parasitic-connection hypothesis

Prem:
The P-C hypothesis predicts that an animal that doesn't dream would need a bigger brain

As you read the answer choices, break them up into bite sized pieces. Ask yourself, "Did this first thing happen? Does it match?" before going onto the rest of the answer choice, because if any part doesn't match up, we'll eliminate the answer.

(A) Starts off matching = facts about the spiny anteater can provide confirmation for hypotheses about all species that are similar in all relevant aspects .... okay, fell off a cliff there.

'provide confirmation' is possibly too strong for 'provides some confirmation'.

'hypotheses about all species' is not a good match for ONE hypothesis (the parasitic connection)

'about all species that are similar in all relevant aspects' is not a good match ... the anteater is NOT similar to the other species because the anteater, unlike other species, does not dream.

(B) Hmm, did they say that "several predictions can be drawn" from the P-C hypothesis? No. And they definitely didn't say that "the majority of these predictions" turn out to be true.

(C) Starts out okay ... the author was trying to confirm a hypothesis about the purpose of dreaming ... the purpose was supposedly to eliminate extraneous brain connections ... did the author show that "eliminating extraneous brain connections" was achieved with the help of dreaming? Kinda. Didn't actually show it, just suggests that dreaming MIGHT do that. More importantly, did the author show that "eliminating extraneous brain connections" could not be achieved WITHOUT dreaming? Definitely not.

(D) Starts out okay ... the author was trying to partially confirm the P-C hypothesis. Is there a prediction derived from the hypothesis? Yes --- the hypothesis predicts that if you don't dream, you'll need a bigger brain. Does this prediction provide an explanation for an otherwise unexplained set of facts? Sure. This prediction would explain why the spiny anteater, which doesn't dream, has an unusually large brain. It matches. It connects Prem to Conc. It looks good.

(E) Do we have several competing hypotheses? Sure, it says early on that a number of hypotheses exist for why dreams occur. The author DOES try to confirm one of them (the P-C hypothesis). Did the author tell us that P-C makes a prediction that the other theories FAIL to make? No. We never hear about the other theories again after that first sentence. Can't match.

Hope this helps.

[deedubbew]

(You're probably thinking, "How do we know there isn't some OTHER explanation for why its brain is so large?" There might be, but it would still be accurate to say that within this paragraph that the anteater's unusually large brain is unexplained otherwise)

Exactly, the question mentioned that there are a number of hypothesis, but talks about only one. One of the other number of hypothesis may relate to why the brain is so large.