A CR Question from LSAT

[jaketyler248]

Zelda: Dr. Ladlow, a research psychologist, has convincingly demonstrated that his theory about the determinants of rat behaviour generates consistently accurate predictions about how rats will perform in a maze. On the basis of this evidence Dr. Ladlow has claimed that his theory is irrefutably correct.
Anson: Then Dr. Ladlow is not responsible psychologist. Dr. Ladlow"Ÿs evidence does not conclusively prove that his theory is correct. Responsible psychologists always accept the possibility that new evidence will show that their theories are incorrect.
Which one of the following can be properly inferred from Anson"Ÿs argument?
(A) Dr. Ladlow"Ÿs evidence that his theory generates consistently accurate predictions about how rates will perform in a maze is inaccurate
(B) Psychologists who can derive consistently accurate predictions about how rats will perform in a maze from their theories cannot responsibly conclude that those theories cannot be disproved
(C) No matter how responsible psychologists are, they can never develop correct theoretical explanations.
(D) Responsible psychologists do not make predictions about how rats will perform in a maze
(E) Psychologists who accept the possibility that new evidence will show that their theories are incorrect are responsible psychologist


The answer given is B.
My question is why can't it be E, which is not making far reaching conclusion and merely restating what is written.

Please advise.

[messi10]

Hi,

I think that you have answered your own question. It is simply restating the premise, not drawing a conclusion. The questions asks for a conclusion

Regards

Sunil

[gurvindersingh2004]

The reason is that All X is Y .
But not all Y is X

Responsible psychologists always accept the possibility that new evidence will show that their theories are incorrect.


responsible psychologists accept
but not all who accept are responsible psych.

[jnelson0612]

Hi,

I think that you have answered your own question. It is simply restating the premise, not drawing a conclusion. The questions asks for a conclusion

Regards

Sunil

Exactly; well stated.