This is an explanation for passage 4 of LSAT preptest 31, the June 2000 LSAT. This passage is about a debate between subjective and objective philosophy and how to make the two sides understand each other.
This section has paragraph summaries and an analysis of the passage, links to the explanations for the questions are below.
- Certain philosophers think that traditional philosophical questions about the mind should be answered by science.
- Other philosophers argue that introspection also provides useful information. Science alone is not enough.
- The argument will surely go on. But it would be nice if the two side could understand each other.
- It’s like religion: you can’t solve a debate by referring to Holy Books. You have to investigate the books themselves.
- So philosophers should investigate their own claims. They will likely learn a lot.
This passage lays out a debate between objective and subjective philosophers of the mind. The former think we should look to objective scientific fact, the latter think we should use our subjective experiences.
The passage is unusual in that it does not stick to this debate. Instead, it argues that the two sides need to learn to talk to each other, even if they’ll never agree. An analogy to religion is made, and a solution proposed: investigate their own assumptions.
The paragraphs have a clearly defined structure: side one, side two, problem, analogy, solution.
It’s important to have this structure in mind so you can locate information more quickly.
Need help with RC? → Try the RC Mastery Seminar
Solve hard passages quickly