®GRE Quantitative Reasoning Free

20 questions · Free Practice

Question 1 of 20
The expectation that science is a stable body of relatively objective knowledge on which the law can draw to settle legal controversies may seem benign. However, this expectation often corresponds to a romantic notion of the scientific enterprise and thereby eclipses not only the instabilities and controversies within science itself, but also the social and rhetorical aspects of even the best science. We see the idealization of science in law whenever there is a presumption that if two scientific experts disagree, one of them must be a "junk scientist." This presumption ignores the theoretical presuppositions and limitations of data that lead to genuine scientific disputes. We also see the idealization of science in law whenever we associate "bias, interest, and motivation" with unreliable expertise. This association misses the practical advances made by scientists who have strong theoretical biases, institutional interests, and financial motivations. Finally, we see the idealization of science in law whenever a legislator, administrator, or judge demands certainty from science, not recognizing its probabilistic nature and dynamic history. It is neither a critique of scientific progress nor an exaggeration to acknowledge scientific debates, the conventional aspects of scientific methodology, the importance of networking and "social capital" with respect to publications and grants, and the persuasive elements in scientific discourse. To think that these features are somehow markers of bad science is to idealize science.

The primary purpose of the passage is to

Rationale

explain why a particular view of science is problematic

The passage critically evaluates the romanticized notion of science as a stable and objective body of knowledge, highlighting how this idealization can obscure the complexities and controversies inherent in scientific practice. It argues that this expectation can lead to misunderstandings in legal contexts and emphasizes the need to recognize the dynamic nature of scientific inquiry. A) This choice accurately captures the primary purpose of the passage, as it discusses the issues arising from the idealized view of science and its implications for legal disputes. The author articulates how this perspective can overlook the complexities of scientific disagreements and the inherent uncertainties in scientific knowledge. B) While the passage does touch on the prevalence of the idealized view of science, it does not primarily focus on accounting for why this view is widespread. Instead, it critiques the consequences of holding such a view, which makes this option less relevant to the main argument. C) The passage does not present a debate about the nature of scientific knowledge in a balanced manner; rather, it critiques a specific view of science and its implications. Therefore, this choice misrepresents the passage’s intent, which is more focused on critique than on presenting a debate. D) Although the passage implies that scientific evidence can be problematic in resolving legal disputes, this is not its primary focus. The main purpose is to critique the idealization of science, making this choice secondary to the overall argument being made. E) This choice suggests an examination of flaws in approaches to resolving scientific disputes, but the passage primarily critiques the idealization of science itself rather than the specific approaches to resolving disputes. Thus, it does not accurately represent the passage's main focus. Conclusion The passage fundamentally critiques the romanticized view of science as a stable and objective body of knowledge, revealing how this perspective can lead to misunderstandings in legal contexts. By highlighting the complexities, controversies, and biases within the scientific enterprise, the author emphasizes the importance of recognizing the dynamic and probabilistic nature of scientific knowledge, rather than viewing it through an idealized lens.

0 of 20 answered · 0 correct

Highest Attempt

87%

Keep practicing to improve!