Q14

[cyt5015]

Can someone help me to eliminate answer C? From line 33-40, I cannot find support for "entirely objective manner" in the correct answer D.
Thanks!

[coldsteady]

While the author would likely agree that the colleagues mentioned in line 33 were incorrect, answer choice (C) incorrectly indicates that the author thinks extensive personal investment enhances scientific rigor. There is no textual basis for attributing this particular view to the author.

We can use the author's own words to determine why (D) is a better answer. Later in the paragraph, the author writes that the aforementioned colleagues subscribed to a view, "...now fortunately recognized as unrealistic," that good data gathering can and must be conducted in a completely detached manner. This allows us to infer that author feels effective data gathering cannot or does not have to be conducted from a position of complete detachment, at least in this case. Answer (D) matches this view very closely.

That's how I viewed it. I hope this helps.

[jm.kahn]

This allows us to infer that author feels effective data gathering cannot or does not have to be conducted from a position of complete detachment, at least in this case. Answer (D) matches this view very closely.

How does D have to be true based on "effective data gathering cannot or doesn't have to be conducted entirely objectively". The passage only supports that one of "cannot" or "doesn't have to be" clause in the above sentence has to be true. One can't infer from it that the "cannot" part, which is what D refers to, has to be true.

The question is a most likely agree question not a must-be-true, but that's still a big gap. Can someone explain this?

[ohthatpatrick]

I think you answered your own question there; you just didn't like the answer.

The correct answer on "most likely agree" does not have to be true. It just has to be the most supportable answer choice there.

We look for any author attitudinal moments relating to the colleagues in line 33 and we get the "fortunately we now see that it's unrealistic" to think as these colleagues do, that effective data gathering must be done in a detached manner.

(A) nothing in that line about "injury" compromising research

(B) their advice was not, "Go easy at first, until you're ready to fully immerse yourself in the dance." It was, "Do NOT get involved in the dancing."

(C) author never claims that being personally involved in your fieldwork USUALLY makes your work more scientifically rigorous.

(E) 'rigor' is brought up in a different window of text .. these colleagues said, "Don't dance. It's very strenuous and you should be detached."

====

If it makes you feel better about (D), consider again the two claims you're thinking might be disputed
- data gathering must be done in a detached manner
and
- data gathering can be done in a detached manner

The author's remark is that we now see that this is "unrealistic".

Does "realism / plausibility" relate more to normative judgments like whether something should/ought/must be done or does it relate more to possibility judgments like whether or not it can be done?

The latter. Hope this helps.