MCAT Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills Question 70: Answer and Explanation

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

Test Information

Question: 70

5. Elsewhere, the author of the passage writes that in 19th century Germany the study of geology, within natural science, was divided into Geognosie, the study of the present-day, essential, and inherent characteristics of the earth, and Geologie, the study of how geological features evolve and come into being. Based on information in the passage, how would the German anthropologists most likely view these two fields of study?

  • A. They would accept both as related and equally essential approaches to a scientific understanding of the earth.
  • B. They would reject both as irrelevant to a scientific understanding of human beings.
  • C. They would accept Geologie as a scientific approach to understanding the nature of the earth, while seeing Geognosie as a questionable attempt to impose rigid categories on inherently changeable features.
  • D. They would see Geognosie as a more scientific approach to geology than Geologie.

Correct Answer: D

Explanation:

D This is a New Information question.

Note: The German anthropologists saw nature as a "static and objective system that could be conclusively known by scientists" (paragraph 3), and believed that "Worse than the idealism of Naturphilosophie was … its view of nature as becoming rather than being, a view antithetical to the concept of nature that anthropologists wanted to use against historicist humanism." While the anthropologists studied human beings, they saw this study as existing within the realm of natural science. Therefore, we can infer that they would accept "Geognosie, the study of the present-day, essential, and inherent characteristics of the earth" as a more legitimate scientific approach than "Geologie, the study of how geological features evolve and come into being."

A: No. The passage suggests that they would prefer Geognosie over Geologie, as more scientific.

B: No. There is no evidence in the question stem or in the passage that the anthropologists would see either, especially Geognosie, as totally irrelevant.

C: No. The passage suggests that the anthropologists themselves were looking for strict categories to apply to humanity (paragraph 1). Therefore, there is no reason to infer that they would see categorization as a problem. Furthermore, the anthropologists believed natural science should look for unchanging, rather than changeable, elements.

D: Yes. Geognosie fits better with the anthropologists' view of legitimate natural science.

Previous       Next