19. As described in the passage, Quine's specific argument against classical empiricism would be most strengthened if he did which of the following?
(E) Gave an example of a specific generalization that has not been invalidated despite a contrary observation.
The language is very intricated . However, the question asks you if Quine is right or wrong, in the end.
The classic empiricism tells you that a statement is true unless you prove is wrong: the balls are red but if you find one blue the statement is false.
Now, for Quine, this must be seen in the context of a broader universe of knowledge and a generalization in the classic model (the balls are red) can even be disputed per se (the ball is blue so the generalization is FALSE) BUT this is nOT a problem. Inside a much wider universe of knowledge, this can be acceptable. The problem is ONLY when a statement and a new observation of that statement (which indeed is a phenomenon) contradict the previous one. THERE arises a conflict that we have to investigate further.
As such, in the chain of the event
Classic = statement >>> obesrvation >>> contrary fact >>>> observation false.
New model = statement >>> observation >>> in a wider universe a contrary fact maybe DOES NOT create the previous statement completely false because we could have an alternative reality. Notice how from all this discussion the physicists have been theorized the existence of the parallel universes in which a person is still the same but instead to play the guitar he /she players the drums. >>> the observation MIGHT be NOT false
(E) Gave an example of a specific generalization that has not been invalidated despite a contrary observation.
If you read above and now read E you do notice are the same statements.
His position will be reinforced IF he gives an example that makes true the generalization even though the contrary observation would say it is false. why ?? because we do have a wider and bigger universe of knowledge
Hope this helpès. This was one of the toughest questions in the GRE world I ever met. Of course, this process in my mind takes 40 seconds but to explain in clear words in far more than simple
Regards