I85PREP
⌘ K
SACE Stage 2 Philosophy study materials
SACE Stage 2 Philosophy study resources

SACE Stage 2 Philosophy practice questions

One question at a time. Build your SACE Stage 2 Philosophy understanding.

First 50 of 200 questions. Each one lists the choices, the correct answer, and an explanation. The checker at the top of this page saves progress in this browser when it is available.

Continue in the practice tool above to load more questions, 50 at a time.

Question 1Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Which branch of philosophy is primarily concerned with the study of the nature, sources and limits of knowledge?

  1. Axiology
  2. Aesthetics
  3. Epistemology Correct answer.
  4. Ontology

Explanation

Epistemology examines what knowledge is, how it is justified, and where its boundaries lie, including questions about belief, truth and justification. The other labels name different branches, such as the study of value or of being, so they do not fit the definition given.

Question 2Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A deductively valid argument is best described as one in which:

  1. the conclusion is more probable than its negation
  2. the conclusion is widely accepted by experts
  3. the premises cannot all be true while the conclusion is false Correct answer.
  4. the premises are all true in the actual world

Explanation

Validity is a matter of form: an argument is valid when there is no possible situation in which every premise is true and the conclusion false. Truth of premises and popularity of the conclusion are separate matters that do not establish validity.

Question 3Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Which statement best captures the principle of universalisability in Kant's ethics?

  1. Act so that the total happiness of all affected is maximised.
  2. Act so that you keep every promise you have made.
  3. Act as a virtuous person would characteristically act.
  4. Act so that your maxim could be willed as a universal law. Correct answer.

Explanation

Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative tests a personal maxim by asking whether it could coherently be willed as a law applying to everyone. The other options describe consequentialist, virtue-based and merely specific rules rather than the universalisability test itself.

Question 4Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

In Plato's allegory of the cave, the prisoners initially take as real:

  1. the shadows cast on the cave wall Correct answer.
  2. the light of the sun outside
  3. the reflections in water
  4. the objects carried behind the wall

Explanation

The prisoners are chained facing a wall and treat the shadows projected before them as the whole of reality. The carried objects, the sun and reflections are encountered only later in the ascent, so they cannot be what the prisoners initially accept.

Question 5Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A statement is analytically true when:

  1. it is accepted by the majority of speakers
  2. it has been confirmed by repeated observation
  3. it is true because of how the world happens to be
  4. it is true because of the meanings of its terms Correct answer.

Explanation

Analytic truths hold in virtue of the concepts involved, as with 'all bachelors are unmarried', so no empirical investigation is needed. Contingent truths, by contrast, depend on how things actually are in the world.

Question 6Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

According to the principle of the greatest happiness, an action is right insofar as it:

  1. tends to promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number Correct answer.
  2. respects the dignity of every rational agent
  3. expresses the character of a temperate person
  4. conforms to a rule that could be universalised

Explanation

Utilitarian thinking assesses actions by their consequences for overall welfare, understood as happiness or pleasure. The other options describe Kantian, rule-based and virtue-ethical standards, which locate rightness elsewhere than in aggregate consequences.

Question 7Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

The problem of induction, as raised by Hume, concerns:

  1. whether past regularities justify predictions about the future Correct answer.
  2. whether mathematical truths are knowable a priori
  3. whether language can refer to abstract objects
  4. whether deductive arguments can have true premises

Explanation

Hume argued that our expectation that the future will resemble the past cannot be justified by reason alone or non-circularly by experience. This challenges the rationality of inductive inference, not deduction or mathematics.

Question 8Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

In a valid modus ponens argument, from 'If P then Q' together with 'P', one may infer:

  1. not Q
  2. not P
  3. P or Q
  4. Q Correct answer.

Explanation

Modus ponens affirms the antecedent of a conditional and thereby derives the consequent, so from the conditional and P we may conclude Q. Denying the antecedent or affirming the consequent would be fallacious, and disjunction introduction would not capture the inference.

Question 9Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A student argues: 'Every philosopher I have read defends free will, so all philosophers defend free will.' Which fallacy does this reasoning commit?

  1. Hasty generalisation Correct answer.
  2. Begging the question
  3. Ad hominem
  4. Equivocation

Explanation

The premise reports a limited sample of philosophers read by one student, and the conclusion generalises to all philosophers. Drawing a broad conclusion from an unrepresentative sample is the classic hasty generalisation, whereas the other fallacies involve circularity, ambiguity or personal attack.

Question 10Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Descartes' evil demon hypothesis is introduced primarily to:

  1. prove that an omnipotent being exists
  2. demonstrate that mathematics is inconsistent
  3. show that the senses may be systematically deceived Correct answer.
  4. establish that the external world is an illusion

Explanation

The demon scenario radicalises ordinary sensory error by supposing a powerful deceiver could make even arithmetic seem certain when it is not. Descartes uses this doubt to find an indubitable foundation, not to assert that the world is illusory or that God exists.

Question 11Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A compatibilist about free will and determinism typically holds that:

  1. determinism is false because quantum events are random
  2. freedom consists in acting from one's own desires without external constraint Correct answer.
  3. free action requires the ability to have done otherwise in an absolute sense
  4. moral responsibility is an illusion produced by ignorance

Explanation

Compatibilists redefine freedom so that it is compatible with causal determination, locating it in unimpeded action that flows from the agent's own wants and reasoning. They therefore deny that freedom requires a contra-causal power to break the causal chain.

Question 12Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

The Euthyphro dilemma asks whether actions are good because God commands them or whether God commands them because they are good. Its main point is to:

  1. establish that moral language is meaningless
  2. show that divine command theory faces a problem of arbitrariness or dependence Correct answer.
  3. demonstrate that virtue ethics is the only coherent theory
  4. prove that God does not exist

Explanation

If goodness is merely whatever God commands, the commands appear arbitrary; if God commands what is independently good, morality does not depend on God. The dilemma thus pressures divine command theory rather than settling theism or the meaning of moral language.

Question 13Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A dualist who holds that mind and body are distinct substances must explain how:

  1. physical particles obey conservation laws
  2. non-physical mental events can cause physical bodily movements Correct answer.
  3. the brain develops from a single cell
  4. language is acquired by children

Explanation

Substance dualism posits two kinds of entity, so it owes an account of how an immaterial mind can interact with a material body. This interaction problem is the standard objection, since causal influence normally seems to require physical contact or energy transfer.

Question 14Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

According to Mill's harm principle, the legitimate exercise of power over an individual is justified when:

  1. the person's action offends prevailing moral sentiment
  2. the person's action harms others Correct answer.
  3. the person's action harms only themselves
  4. the majority believes the action is unwise

Explanation

Mill limits coercion to the prevention of harm to others, leaving self-regarding conduct outside the scope of social control. Offence, paternalism over self-harm and majority disapproval are precisely the grounds he wishes to exclude.

Question 15Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A deductive argument has true premises and a false conclusion. What follows about its validity?

  1. Nothing can be determined about its form
  2. It is valid but unsound
  3. It is sound
  4. It is invalid Correct answer.

Explanation

A valid argument cannot have all true premises and a false conclusion, so such an argument must be invalid. Soundness additionally requires validity and true premises, and here validity already fails.

Question 16Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Ayer's verification principle held that a sentence is cognitively meaningful only if it is:

  1. approved by a community of inquirers
  2. capable of being doubted
  3. consistent with common sense
  4. analytically true or empirically verifiable Correct answer.

Explanation

Logical positivists divided meaningful statements into analytic truths and those verifiable by experience, dismissing metaphysical claims as neither. Common sense, communal approval and doubtability do not supply the criterion Ayer proposed.

Question 17Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

The is-ought problem, associated with Hume, warns that:

  1. moral claims are always false
  2. ought claims are meaningless
  3. descriptive claims about what is cannot by themselves entail prescriptive claims about what ought to be Correct answer.
  4. science can settle all moral disputes

Explanation

Hume observed that arguments often slide from statements about what is the case to conclusions about what ought to be done without explaining the transition. The gap concerns the logical relation between description and prescription, not the truth or meaning of moral claims.

Question 18Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Which of the following best illustrates the naturalistic fallacy as Moore described it?

  1. Arguing that moral rules vary between cultures
  2. Holding that moral judgements express emotions
  3. Defining good as whatever produces the most pleasure Correct answer.
  4. Claiming that pleasure is sometimes harmful

Explanation

Moore argued that identifying good with a natural property such as pleasure confuses the property of goodness with something that is merely good. His open question argument presses that we can always sensibly ask whether pleasure is good, which would be trivial if the terms were synonymous.

Question 19Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A Gettier-style case is designed to show that:

  1. belief is unnecessary for knowledge
  2. justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge Correct answer.
  3. truth is unnecessary for knowledge
  4. knowledge is impossible

Explanation

Gettier cases present a subject with a justified true belief that nevertheless seems not to count as knowledge because the truth is accidental. They therefore challenge the analysis of knowledge as justified true belief, not the possibility of knowledge altogether.

Question 20Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Sartre's claim that humans are 'condemned to be free' means that:

  1. freedom is granted by political institutions
  2. freedom is an illusion created by social conditioning
  3. freedom consists in following universal moral laws
  4. freedom is a burden because we cannot avoid choosing and are responsible for our choices Correct answer.

Explanation

For Sartre, existence precedes essence, so no fixed nature determines our choices and we cannot escape the responsibility of self-definition. This makes freedom burdensome, in contrast with accounts that ground freedom in institutions, universal law or deny it altogether.

Question 21Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

An argument concludes that a policy is bad because the person proposing it is dishonest. This reasoning is flawed because it:

  1. attacks the arguer rather than the argument Correct answer.
  2. assumes what it sets out to prove
  3. uses a term ambiguously
  4. appeals to an irrelevant authority

Explanation

The dishonesty of a proponent is logically independent of the merits of the policy, so rejecting the policy on that basis is an ad hominem move. The flaw concerns the source of the claim rather than the claim's evidential support.

Question 22Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Hume's bundle theory holds that the self is:

  1. a social construct produced by language
  2. a simple, unchanging spiritual substance
  3. a collection of perceptions with no underlying owner Correct answer.
  4. a physical object located in the brain

Explanation

Hume could find no impression of a persisting self, only particular perceptions succeeding one another, and concluded that the self is a bundle of these. This denies both a simple spiritual substance and a straightforward bodily criterion of personal identity.

Question 23Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Suppose a valid argument has a false conclusion. What must be true of its premises?

  1. The premises are irrelevant to the conclusion
  2. All premises are false
  3. All premises are true
  4. At least one premise is false Correct answer.

Explanation

Since a valid argument cannot have all true premises and a false conclusion, a false conclusion guarantees that not every premise is true. It does not require that all premises be false, since only one false premise may suffice.

Question 24Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A determinist who denies free will and a libertarian who affirms it disagree most fundamentally about:

  1. whether moral language is meaningful
  2. whether every event is causally determined and whether freedom requires indeterminism Correct answer.
  3. whether the mind is identical with the brain
  4. whether ethical judgements are objective

Explanation

The hard determinist accepts universal causation and concludes that freedom is incompatible with it, while the libertarian denies determinism or holds that free action requires genuine alternative possibilities. Their dispute is therefore about the scope of determinism and the conditions of freedom, not about meaning, mind or objectivity.

Question 25Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A philosopher argues: 'Either our choices are caused, or they are random. Caused choices are unfree and random choices are unfree, so no choice is free.' The strongest compatibilist reply is that:

  1. causation never occurs in human behaviour
  2. the dilemma ignores the possibility of acting from one's own endorsed desires Correct answer.
  3. freedom is irrelevant to moral responsibility
  4. randomness does sometimes produce free choices

Explanation

The compatibilist challenges the first horn by arguing that being caused by one's own reflective desires is precisely what free action consists in, so causation does not automatically undermine freedom. This rejects the exhaustive framing rather than embracing randomness or denying causation.

Question 26Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

According to Plato's allegory of the cave, the prisoners initially mistake which of the following for reality?

  1. The objects carried behind them
  2. The sun outside the cave
  3. Shadows cast on the cave wall Correct answer.
  4. Mathematical forms grasped by reason

Explanation

Plato depicts prisoners chained so they see only shadows projected on a wall and treat these as the whole of reality. The ascent out of the cave represents the turning of the soul toward genuine knowledge of the Forms.

Question 27Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

In epistemology, a belief is described as 'justified' when it is:

  1. Shared by the majority of a community
  2. Held with great emotional conviction
  3. Caused by reliable brain processes alone
  4. Supported by adequate reasons or evidence Correct answer.

Explanation

Justification concerns whether a belief is backed by good grounds, such as evidence or sound reasoning. Mere confidence, popularity, or causal origin does not by itself supply those grounds.

Question 28Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A utilitarian who must choose between two actions compares them by asking which one:

  1. Respects the most stringent moral duty
  2. Best expresses the agent's virtuous character
  3. Produces the greatest net well-being overall Correct answer.
  4. Has the fairest procedure of decision-making

Explanation

Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory that evaluates actions solely by their outcomes, specifically aggregate welfare. Duty, character, and procedural fairness belong to rival frameworks.

Question 29Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

An argument that is valid and whose premises are all true is described as:

  1. Fallacious
  2. Persuasive
  3. Inductive
  4. Sound Correct answer.

Explanation

Soundness combines validity with true premises, guaranteeing a true conclusion. Validity alone concerns the form of the inference, not the truth of what it contains.

Question 30Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Berkeley's idealist thesis holds that the objects we perceive:

  1. Are unknowable noumena behind appearance
  2. Exist as mind-independent material substances
  3. Are collections of ideas existing only in minds Correct answer.
  4. Are reducible to arrangements of atoms

Explanation

Berkeley denies material substance and claims that sensible objects consist entirely of ideas, whose existence depends on being perceived. This is captured in his slogan that to be is to be perceived.

Question 31Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

The principle of universalisability in Kant's ethics requires that an agent:

  1. Consult their feelings before each decision
  2. Act only on maxims one could will as universal law Correct answer.
  3. Maximise total happiness across all persons
  4. Follow the customs of one's own society

Explanation

Kant's categorical imperative tests a maxim by asking whether it could consistently be willed as a universal law. This formal test is meant to capture moral duty independently of consequences or sentiment.

Question 32Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A statement is analytic, in the standard philosophical sense, when it is:

  1. Confirmed by repeated observation
  2. Accepted by expert consensus
  3. Expresses a personal preference
  4. True by virtue of the meanings of its terms Correct answer.

Explanation

Analytic truths, such as 'all bachelors are unmarried', hold in virtue of the concepts involved rather than empirical investigation. They contrast with synthetic statements, which add information about the world.

Question 33Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

In Rawls's original position, the 'veil of ignorance' is designed to ensure that principles of justice are chosen:

  1. By those with the greatest natural talents
  2. According to the majority's current preferences
  3. By rulers who possess specialist expertise
  4. Impartially, without knowledge of one's social position Correct answer.

Explanation

The veil removes knowledge of one's talents, wealth, and status so that parties cannot tailor principles to their own advantage. Rawls argues this procedure yields fair principles, including his difference principle.

Question 34Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A student writes: 'If the theory of evolution is true, then species change over time. Species do change over time. Therefore the theory of evolution is true.' This reasoning commits which fallacy?

  1. Denying the antecedent
  2. Affirming the consequent Correct answer.
  3. Equivocation
  4. Begging the question

Explanation

The argument has the form 'If P then Q; Q; therefore P', which is invalid because the consequent may have other causes. Valid conditional reasoning instead affirms the antecedent or denies the consequent.

Question 35Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A doctor reasons that a treatment works because most patients who recovered received it. The reasoning is weak mainly because it:

  1. Assumes that recovery is impossible without treatment
  2. Uses statistical data rather than deductive proof
  3. Relies on testimony from a single expert
  4. Ignores whether patients who did not receive it also recovered Correct answer.

Explanation

The evidence omits a comparison group, so the correlation between treatment and recovery cannot establish that the treatment caused recovery. Without the base rate among untreated patients, the inference is unsupported.

Question 36Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A compatibilist about freedom would most likely describe a person as acting freely when they:

  1. Act without any desires influencing them
  2. Perform an action that could not have been predicted
  3. Act on desires they reflectively endorse, even if those desires are caused Correct answer.
  4. Choose in a way that no prior cause determines

Explanation

Compatibilists identify freedom with a certain structure of agency, such as acting from endorsed desires, rather than with exemption from causation. On this view determinism and moral responsibility can coexist.

Question 37Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A jury must decide a case. A juror says: 'If the defendant is guilty, the weapon will bear his prints. The weapon bears his prints, so he is guilty.' The best criticism is that the argument:

  1. Assumes what it sets out to prove
  2. Commits a straw man fallacy
  3. Treats a necessary condition as sufficient Correct answer.
  4. Uses an irrelevant emotional appeal

Explanation

Fingerprints are offered as a necessary consequence of guilt, but other explanations could produce them, so their presence cannot establish guilt. The inference wrongly treats a consequence of a hypothesis as proof of it.

Question 38Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

According to Aristotle, a virtue such as courage is best understood as:

  1. A gift of nature that cannot be cultivated
  2. A feeling that arises without rational assessment
  3. A fixed rule that forbids all risk
  4. A disposition to choose the mean relative to us, guided by practical wisdom Correct answer.

Explanation

Aristotle treats virtues as stable character dispositions aiming at an appropriate intermediate between excess and deficiency. Practical wisdom determines that mean in particular circumstances, and habituation develops the disposition.

Question 39Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A sceptic argues that because our senses have deceived us at least once, we can never be certain of any perceptual belief. This argument is vulnerable because it:

  1. Concludes that all perception is unreliable from limited cases of error Correct answer.
  2. Assumes that certainty is impossible in mathematics
  3. Relies on a definition of knowledge as true belief
  4. Denies the existence of an external world

Explanation

The premise reports occasional sensory error, which supports only caution, not the sweeping conclusion that perception is never trustworthy. The inference generalises illegitimately from a few failures to all cases.

Question 40Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

The doctrine of double effect permits an action with a foreseen harmful side-effect when:

  1. The good effect is intended and the harm is neither intended nor a means to the good Correct answer.
  2. The net benefits outweigh the harms by any margin
  3. The agent had no knowledge of the likely harm
  4. The harm is intended as a means to the good end

Explanation

Double effect distinguishes intended ends from foreseen consequences, permitting the latter only under conditions such as proportionality and non-use of the harm as a means. Intending harm as a means is excluded.

Question 41Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A scientist claims a hypothesis is scientific because it has survived many tests. A critic replies that a hypothesis which forbids no possible observation cannot be scientific. The critic is invoking:

  1. The principle of sufficient reason
  2. Ockham's razor
  3. The criterion of falsifiability Correct answer.
  4. The principle of charity

Explanation

Falsifiability requires that a genuine empirical hypothesis rule out some observable outcomes, so that evidence could count against it. A claim compatible with every possible observation fails this test.

Question 42Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A person says: 'I know I am in pain.' A critic objects that this misuse of 'know' shows the word requires:

  1. A scientific theory of pain
  2. A possibility of doubt or error to be ruled out Correct answer.
  3. A community to certify the claim
  4. A memory of previous pain

Explanation

Knowledge claims are normally governed by standards that allow for the possibility of mistake. Where error is inconceivable, as with immediate sensation, philosophers argue the concept of knowledge has no application.

Question 43Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A government claims that a policy is just because it was passed by a majority vote. A critic responds that majority support does not by itself make a policy just. The critic's point is that:

  1. Voting should be abolished in favour of expert rule
  2. Procedural legitimacy and substantive justice are distinct questions Correct answer.
  3. Majorities are always wrong about justice
  4. Justice is simply whatever the law says

Explanation

A democratic procedure can confer legitimacy on a decision while the decision's fairness remains an open question. Conflating how a policy was chosen with whether it is just is the error being identified.

Question 44Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A student argues: 'Either we ban all cars or we do nothing about pollution. Doing nothing is unacceptable, so we must ban all cars.' The argument is flawed because it:

  1. Uses a false dilemma Correct answer.
  2. Generalises from an unrepresentative sample
  3. Draws a conclusion about what ought to be from premises about what is
  4. Attacks a person rather than a position

Explanation

The premise presents only two options when many intermediate policies exist, so the disjunction is falsely exhaustive. A valid disjunctive syllogism requires that the alternatives genuinely exhaust the possibilities.

Question 45Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Hobbes argues that people in a state of nature submit to a sovereign because:

  1. The social contract creates innate moral duties
  2. Political authority is divinely ordained
  3. Life without common power is a war of all against all Correct answer.
  4. Humans naturally desire monarchical government

Explanation

Hobbes grounds political obligation in the fear of violent conflict that arises when no common power restrains people. Rational self-preservation motivates the transfer of natural liberty to a sovereign.

Question 46Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A researcher reports that a drug reduces symptoms, but the trial lacked a control group and participants knew they were receiving the drug. The strongest methodological objection is that:

  1. Drugs cannot be tested empirically
  2. Improvement may result from expectation rather than the drug Correct answer.
  3. The sample size was too large
  4. Symptoms are impossible to measure

Explanation

Without a control group or blinding, placebo and expectancy effects cannot be separated from the drug's action. Causal conclusions require comparison against an appropriate baseline.

Question 47Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A philosopher holds that all truths are knowable in principle. A critic constructs a statement that is true but cannot be known. The critic's method is best described as:

  1. A reductio ad absurdum of empiricism
  2. A counterexample by possible construction Correct answer.
  3. A transcendental deduction
  4. An appeal to authority

Explanation

The critic produces a specific case satisfying the conditions of the thesis while violating its claim, which is the standard counterexample method. A single well-formed counterexample suffices to refute a universal claim.

Question 48Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Suppose a person's action is fully determined by prior causes, yet she deliberates and acts on reasons she endorses. The strongest compatibilist defence of her responsibility rests on the claim that:

  1. Determinism is false because deliberation feels free
  2. Moral responsibility is an illusion we should abandon
  3. Acting from endorsed reasons is the relevant kind of control Correct answer.
  4. Responsibility requires the ability to have done otherwise in an absolute sense

Explanation

Compatibilists argue that the control relevant to responsibility is guidance by one's own reasons and dispositions, not exemption from causation. On this account determinism does not undermine accountability.

Question 49Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

A theory is criticised for being unfalsifiable yet is defended on the grounds that it explains many observations. The best reply to this defence is that:

  1. The theory should be accepted because it is widely believed
  2. A theory compatible with all observations gains no evidential support from any of them Correct answer.
  3. Observations can never support any theory
  4. Explanatory power is irrelevant to every scientific question

Explanation

If a theory rules out nothing, then every possible observation counts equally in its favour, so no observation confirms it. Evidential support requires that the theory take a risk and could have failed.

Question 50Rational investigation of questions about existence, knowledge and ethics

Two theories explain the same data, but one posits three unobservable entities and the other posits one. A methodological preference for the simpler theory is justified primarily because:

  1. Complex theories are logically inconsistent
  2. Unobservable entities never exist
  3. Fewer posits reduce the risk of error and make the theory easier to test Correct answer.
  4. Simpler theories are always more likely to be true

Explanation

Ockham's razor is a heuristic: simpler hypotheses are easier to test and introduce fewer opportunities for mistaken posits. It does not guarantee truth, since simplicity is not itself proof.