Text 1The story of Archimedes leaping from his bath and running naked through Syracuse shouting "Eureka!" upon discovering the principle...
GMAT Craft and Structure : (Structure) Questions
The story of Archimedes leaping from his bath and running naked through Syracuse shouting "Eureka!" upon discovering the principle of water displacement has become one of science's most beloved anecdotes. According to this tale, the insight struck suddenly while he observed water overflowing as he entered his bath, leading him to realize he could measure irregular volumes—a breakthrough that would revolutionize physics and engineering.
Text 2
While no contemporary sources document Archimedes' famous bath incident, this hasn't prevented the story from becoming entrenched in scientific folklore. The persistence of this narrative reveals something significant about how we conceptualize scientific discovery. We're so invested in the idea that scientific breakthroughs happen through sudden, dramatic insights that we've embraced and perpetuated tales that embody this romantic vision of discovery, regardless of their historical validity.
Based on the texts, the author of Text 2 would most likely argue that the account in Text 1:
Accurately represents how most significant scientific discoveries actually occur in practice.
Reflects our idealized conception of scientific breakthrough more than documented historical events.
Demonstrates that ancient scientists like Archimedes were more intuitive than their modern counterparts.
Shows how scientific insights emerge from careful observation rather than theoretical speculation.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "The story of Archimedes leaping from his bath and running naked through Syracuse shouting 'Eureka!' upon discovering the principle of water displacement has become one of science's most beloved anecdotes." |
|
| "According to this tale, the insight struck suddenly while he observed water overflowing as he entered his bath, leading him to realize he could measure irregular volumes—a breakthrough that would revolutionize physics and engineering." |
|
| "While no contemporary sources document Archimedes' famous bath incident, this hasn't prevented the story from becoming entrenched in scientific folklore." |
|
| "The persistence of this narrative reveals something significant about how we conceptualize scientific discovery." |
|
| "We're so invested in the idea that scientific breakthroughs happen through sudden, dramatic insights that we've embraced and perpetuated tales that embody this romantic vision of discovery, regardless of their historical validity." |
|
Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Text 2 argues that the Archimedes story persists not because it's historically accurate, but because it satisfies our romantic idealization of scientific discovery as sudden, dramatic breakthroughs.
Argument Flow: Text 1 presents the famous Archimedes discovery story as a sudden, dramatic breakthrough. Text 2 then critiques this by noting the lack of contemporary evidence and arguing that we perpetuate such tales because they match our idealized vision of how scientific discovery works, regardless of whether they actually happened.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
What's being asked? What would the author of Text 2 most likely argue about the account presented in Text 1?
What type of answer do we need? Text 2 author's perspective or judgment about Text 1's narrative
Any limiting keywords? "most likely argue" - we need the answer that best matches Text 2's critical perspective
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- The author of Text 2 is clearly skeptical about the historical accuracy of the Archimedes story
- They point out there's no contemporary evidence for it, yet acknowledge it persists in folklore
- Most importantly, they argue this persistence reveals our psychological investment in romantic, dramatic visions of scientific discovery - we embrace these tales "regardless of their historical validity"
- Text 2's author would likely argue that Text 1's account represents our idealized conception of breakthrough moments rather than documented history
- The right answer should reflect this idea that the story embodies how we want scientific discovery to work (sudden, dramatic insights) more than how it actually happened
Accurately represents how most significant scientific discoveries actually occur in practice.
✗ Incorrect
- Suggests Text 1 accurately shows how discoveries typically happen
- Text 2 directly contradicts this - argues we embrace romantic visions "regardless of historical validity"
- What trap this represents: Students might think since Text 1 describes a discovery process, Text 2 endorses it as realistic
Reflects our idealized conception of scientific breakthrough more than documented historical events.
✓ Correct
- Matches Text 2's core argument perfectly - we have "embraced and perpetuated tales that embody this romantic vision of discovery"
- Captures the contrast between our "idealized conception" and "documented historical events"
- Aligns with Text 2's point about persistence "regardless of historical validity"
Demonstrates that ancient scientists like Archimedes were more intuitive than their modern counterparts.
✗ Incorrect
- Focuses on comparing ancient vs. modern scientists' intuition
- Text 2 never makes this historical comparison - focuses on our modern romanticization of discovery stories
Shows how scientific insights emerge from careful observation rather than theoretical speculation.
✗ Incorrect
- Emphasizes observation vs. theoretical speculation
- Text 2's argument isn't about discovery methods but about our psychological need for dramatic breakthrough narratives