MCAT Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills Question 14: Answer and Explanation

Home > MCAT Test > MCAT critical analysis and reasoning skills practice tests

Test Information

Question: 14

3. Based on the passage, what best explains how "all causal reasoning presupposes 'that the future resembles the past'" (paragraph 4)?

  • A. Reasoning about causality is ultimately founded on an assumption established by custom rather than by logic.
  • B. The laws of nature must be unchanging from past to future.
  • C. It is not necessarily the case that the past and future resemble one another.
  • D. Past conjunctions of cause and effect would yield no causal knowledge if the future operated by new laws of nature.

Correct Answer: D

Explanation:

Having unpacked the claim, now it's time to find the answer choice that actually provides the explanation requested. Begin with (A), "Reasoning about causality is ultimately founded on an assumption established by custom rather than by logic." The last part is simply a reference to the claim that the future resembles the past, which means that altogether this choice is simply a restatement of the quoted line from the question stem. This provides at most a minimal explanation, so it is unlikely to be the correct answer, particularly since the question asks for "what best explains."

The statement in choice (B) ("The laws of nature must be unchanging from past to future") is, as was noted in the Plan step, simply another way of saying the future resembles the past. This is another restatement, this time of only part of the quotation in the question stem, so it's even less helpful than the previous choice. It can safely be ruled out.

While (C), "It is not necessarily the case that the past and future resemble one another," does not rehash the quoted claim, it is effectively a reiteration of something said in P4, that the claim that the future resembles the past "need not be true." This is another way of saying the claim is not logically or necessarily true, but it does not explain how the claim is presupposed in causal reasoning. Thus, this choice can also be eliminated.

The process of elimination would suggest the answer must be choice (D), "Past conjunctions of cause and effect would yield no causal knowledge if the future operated by new laws of nature." Be sure to evaluate it first to ensure that it is superior to the minimal explanation given by (A).

Upon examination, (D) provides by far the best explanation, going beyond the mere repetition of claims to some of the underlying ideas in the text. "Causal knowledge" must be referring to the knowledge gained from causal reasoning, that is, the conclusions, which are backed by observation. Now, these observations ("past conjunctions of cause and effect") would be worthless if the future stopped resembling the past, because that past knowledge would no longer apply. The author's rhetorical question at the end of P4 ("How do we know the laws of nature won't change tomorrow?") is hinting at this same idea, but this choice spells it out explicitly.

Previous       Next