LSAT 142 | Section 3 | Reading Comprehension: Q19

RC Question 19 Explanation

DISCUSSION: Hume was a famous and respected philosopher. By mentioning that Hume and Ayer agree, the author lends credibility to Ayer’s argument.

___________

1. Not so. It’s an insult to say that someone is not an original thinker. The author agrees with Ayer, so there’s no reason the author would try to insult Ayer.
   While Hume argued something similar to Ayer, it seems as though Ayer has produced a theory that has new details. If Ayer had no new ideas, the author would have just discussed Hume directly.
2. CORRECT. David Hume is a famous, respected philosopher. By suggesting that Hume agrees with Ayer, the author lends respect to Ayer’s theory.
3. Nonsense. If you read everything in context, it’s clear that the author is discussing the present, not the past. The author of passage B makes no reference to the past apart from mentioning David Hume.
4. This is wrong for two reasons. First, while Hume agrees we can be free in a deterministic world, that’s not necessarily the same thing as “soft determinism”. Soft determinism is Ayer’s theory.
   Secondly, Ayer invented soft determinism in 1954. Mechanistic ideas appear to have been around before that.
5. The author did not say that neuroscientists are wrong to describe the brain mechanistically. The author merely thinks that determinism and free will aren’t contradictory concepts; see lines 29-31. In other words, the brain acts mechanistically, but we can still call ourselves free.