Directions : Read the given passage and answer the questions based on that…
2022
Directions : Read the given passage and answer the questions based on that
What it means to "explain" something in science often comes down to the application of mathematics. Some thinkers hold that mathematics is a kind of language--a systematic contrivance of signs, the criteria for the authority of which are internal coherence, elegance, and depth. The application of such a highly artificial system to the physical world, they claim, results in the creation of a kind of statement about the world. Accordingly, what matters in the sciences is finding a mathematical concept that attempts, as other language does, to describe the functioning of some aspect of the world. At the center of the issue of scientific knowledge can thus be found questions about the relationship between language and what it refers to. A discussion about the role played by language in the pursuit of knowledge has been going on among linguists for several decades. The debate is on whether language corresponds in some essential way to objects and behaviors, making knowledge a solid and reliable commodity; or, on the other hand, whether the relationship between language and things is purely a matter of agreed-upon conventions, making knowledge tenuous, relative, and inexact.
Lately the latter theory has been gaining wider acceptance. According to linguists who support this theory, the way language is used varies depending upon changes in accepted practices and theories among those who work in particular discipline. These linguists argue that, in the pursuit of knowledge, a statement is true only when there are no promising alternatives that might lead one to question it. Certainly, this characterization would seem to be applicable to the sciences. In science, a mathematical statement may be taken to account for every aspect of a phenomenon it is applied to, but some would argue, there is nothing inherent in mathematical language. Under this view, acceptance of a mathematical statement by the scientific community--by virtue of the statement's predictive power or methodological efficiency--transforms what is basically an analogy or metaphor into an explanation of the physical process in question, to be held as true until another, more compelling analogy takes its place.
Which of the following is the main idea of the passage?
- A.
Claiming mathematics a language is an obtrusive idea.
- B.
The fundamental of mathematics is in complete in line with the concept of language
- C.
Though being argued, perceiving mathematics as a language cannot be ruled out.
- D.
Only (a) and (b)
- E.
Only (b) and (c)
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: C
CONCEPT: The main idea of a passage is the single controlling claim that the whole text builds toward, not a minor detail, an example, or an extreme restatement. To find it, identify the author's overall stance after weighing the discussion presented.
APPLICATION: This passage opens by noting that scientific explanation often reduces to applying mathematics, then frames a debate about whether mathematics is 'a kind of language'. It lays out two linguistic views, observes that the relativist/conventional view is 'gaining wider acceptance', and closes by saying the scientific community's acceptance of a mathematical statement turns what is 'basically an analogy or metaphor into an explanation' held true until a more compelling one replaces it. The author never declares the matter settled, yet treats the language view as a live, defensible position.
RESULT: The statement 'Though being argued, perceiving mathematics as a language cannot be ruled out' captures exactly this balance: the idea is contested yet remains viable. That is the controlling thought of the passage.
CONTRAST with the near-misses:
Calling the language idea 'obtrusive' (intrusive / unwelcome) misreads the tone; the passage presents the idea neutrally and even sympathetically, never as an imposition.
Saying mathematics is 'completely in line' with the concept of language overstates it; the text describes mathematics only as an analogy or metaphor and explicitly keeps the question open, so an absolute equivalence is not claimed.
A combination that pairs the misread 'obtrusive' claim with the overstated 'completely in line' claim cannot be the main idea, since neither member matches the passage's measured stance.
A combination resting on the overstated 'completely in line' claim fails for the same reason: one of its members contradicts the passage's deliberately open, non-absolute treatment.