Q24 - A theory cannot properly be

[Laura Damone]

Question Type:
Inference (Principle Example)

Stimulus Breakdown:
No argument here. So, we diagram the principle and its contrapositive: theory empirical --> possible to refute with an observation
-possible to refute with an observation --> -theory empirical

Answer Anticipation:
Look for an answer that follows the pattern of either the principle or its contrapositive, providing evidence that fulfills the sufficient condition and concluding that the necessary condition is also fulfilled. Note that a study being empirical is a sufficient condition and can therefore never be concluded.

Correct answer:
C

Answer choice analysis:
(A) If no one was present at the origin of the universe, is there an observation that could refute the Big Bang theory? Unlikely. Thus, it's not an empirical theory. Sounds good!

(B) This is backwards. If there's no observation that could refute a theory, it's not empirical. Not the other way around! Eliminate!

(C) Another strong answer! If there is no conceivable observation that could show psychoanalysis to be false, it's not empirical. That perfectly matches the principle. A, on the other hand, isn't quite a perfect match because we had to infer "no conceivable observation" from the fact that there was no witness to the big bang. Since we didn't have to make that leap in C, C is the better answer.

(D) Concludes a theory is empirical. Eliminate!

(E) Doesn't address the concept of an empirical theory. Eliminate!

Takeaway/Pattern:
For Principle Example questions, diagram the principle and contrapose it. Look for an answer that follows one of those two patterns exactly, and eliminate any that illegally reverse or negate the principles (B and D).

#officialexplanation