Conflicting Viewpoints
Compare and analyze competing scientific theories and hypotheses
Conflicting Viewpoints (ACT Science)
What Are Conflicting Viewpoints Passages?
Unique to ACT Science! (Only 1 passage of this type)
Format
- One passage presents 2-3 different viewpoints on a scientific topic
- Each viewpoint = different hypothesis, theory, or explanation
- All viewpoints address the same phenomenon
What's Being Tested
- Understanding each viewpoint
- Identifying similarities and differences
- Recognizing supporting evidence
- Determining what would strengthen/weaken each theory
Passage Structure
Introduction
- Describes the phenomenon or question being debated
- Provides background information
- Sets up the controversy
Scientist 1 (or Student 1/Hypothesis 1)
- Presents first explanation
- Provides supporting evidence
- May explain mechanism
Scientist 2 (or Student 2/Hypothesis 2)
- Presents alternative explanation
- Provides different evidence
- May contradict Scientist 1
Scientist 3 (sometimes)
- Third perspective
- May combine elements of 1 and 2
- Or offer completely different view
Common Question Types
1. Understanding Each Viewpoint
"According to Scientist 1, X occurs because..." "Scientist 2 would claim that..."
Strategy:
- Go to that scientist's section
- Find the specific claim
- Don't confuse with other scientists
2. Comparing Viewpoints
"On which point would Scientists 1 and 2 agree?" "Scientists 1 and 2 disagree about..."
Strategy:
- Find points mentioned by BOTH
- Agreement = same conclusion
- Disagreement = different conclusions
3. Identifying Similarities
"Both scientists would agree that..." "All three hypotheses assume that..."
What they often agree on:
- Basic observations/facts
- The phenomenon exists
- Certain background information
- General principles
What they disagree on:
- The EXPLANATION
- The MECHANISM
- The CAUSE
- Which factors are important
4. Supporting/Weakening Evidence
"Which finding would support Scientist 2's hypothesis?" "Which observation would weaken Scientist 1's claim?"
Strategy:
- Understand what each scientist claims
- Support = evidence that matches their prediction
- Weaken = evidence that contradicts their prediction
5. Prediction Questions
"Based on Scientist 1's viewpoint, if X increased, then Y would..."
Strategy:
- Apply the scientist's logic
- Make prediction consistent with their explanation
- Think about cause-and-effect they proposed
How to Read Conflicting Viewpoints Passages
Step 1: Read the Introduction Carefully
- Understand the phenomenon being explained
- Note what is observed/known
- Identify the question being debated
Step 2: Summarize Each Viewpoint
As you read each scientist, note:
- Main claim/hypothesis
- Key evidence
- Mechanism explained
- One key difference from others
Step 3: Create a Mental Table
| Aspect | Scientist 1 | Scientist 2 | |--------|-------------|-------------| | Main claim | ... | ... | | Key evidence | ... | ... | | Mechanism | ... | ... |
Step 4: Answer Questions
- Go back to specific sections
- Compare across viewpoints
- Apply the logic of each scientist
Types of Scientific Disagreements
1. Different Explanations, Same Data
- Both observe the same thing
- Disagree on WHY it happens
Example:
- Observation: Dinosaurs went extinct
- Scientist 1: Asteroid impact
- Scientist 2: Volcanic activity
2. Different Emphasis on Factors
- Agree multiple factors exist
- Disagree on which is most important
Example:
- Both agree genes AND environment matter
- Scientist 1: Genes are primary
- Scientist 2: Environment is primary
3. Different Mechanisms
- Agree on outcome
- Disagree on HOW it happens
Example:
- Both agree evolution occurs
- Scientist 1: Gradual changes
- Scientist 2: Rapid changes after long stability
Common Wrong Answer Traps
1. Mixing Up Scientists
- Attributing Scientist 1's claim to Scientist 2
- Fix: Clearly note who says what
2. Overgeneralizing Agreement
- Saying they agree when they only agree on basics
- Fix: Look for substantive agreement, not just background
3. Picking Irrelevant Evidence
- For support/weaken questions
- Evidence doesn't relate to their specific claim
- Fix: Match evidence to the KEY claim
4. Reversing Support/Weaken
- Picking evidence that weakens when asked for support
- Fix: Double-check what the question asks
Strategies for Success
Time Management
- These passages take longer (more reading)
- But questions are often straightforward
- Spend time understanding viewpoints first
Active Reading
Underline or note:
- Each scientist's main claim
- Key pieces of evidence
- Words showing contrast (however, unlike, in contrast)
Use Comparison
Make quick notes:
- "S1: claims A, S2: claims B"
- "Both agree: X, Disagree: Y"
Elimination Strategy
- Cross out answers that contradict the passage
- Eliminate answers mixing up scientists
- Choose best remaining answer
Key Phrases to Watch
Agreement Indicators
- "Both scientists acknowledge..."
- "All hypotheses agree..."
- "Neither scientist disputes..."
Disagreement Indicators
- "Unlike Scientist 1, Scientist 2..."
- "In contrast to..."
- "Scientist 1 claims X, while Scientist 2 claims Y"
Support/Weaken Clues
- "Would strengthen..." = find consistent evidence
- "Would weaken..." = find contradictory evidence
- "Is consistent with..." = matches the viewpoint
Sample Approach
Topic: Why do leaves change color in fall?
Scientist 1: Temperature triggers chemical changes
- Evidence: Happens at same temp each year
- Mechanism: Cold breaks down chlorophyll
Scientist 2: Day length (photoperiod) is the trigger
- Evidence: Happens at same date, different latitudes
- Mechanism: Shorter days signal chemical changes
Both agree:
- Leaves change color
- It's a biological process
- Happens in fall
They disagree:
- What triggers the change (temp vs. day length)
ACT Tips
- Only 1 passage of this type on ACT (usually 7 questions)
- Don't need science knowledge - all info is in the passage
- Make a simple chart comparing viewpoints
- Watch for: "both," "neither," "all" - check carefully!
- Support/weaken questions: Think like each scientist
- Take your time - understanding viewpoints makes questions easier
📚 Practice Problems
1Problem 1easy
❓ Question:
In a Conflicting Viewpoints passage, what do the different scientists typically AGREE about?
A) The explanation for why something happens B) The basic observations and facts C) Which evidence is most important D) The mechanism behind the phenomenon
💡 Show Solution
Solution:
Scientists typically DISAGREE on:
- A) Explanation/interpretation ❌
- C) Which evidence matters most ❌
- D) The mechanism/how it works ❌
Scientists typically AGREE on:
- B) Basic facts and observations ✓
- That the phenomenon exists
- Background information
- General principles
Example:
- Both agree: Dinosaurs went extinct (fact)
- Disagree: Why (asteroid vs. volcanoes)
Answer: B - The basic observations and facts
ACT Tip: They usually agree on WHAT happened, disagree on WHY or HOW!
2Problem 2medium
❓ Question:
Scenario:
Scientist 1 claims climate change is primarily caused by solar activity. Scientist 2 claims climate change is primarily caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
Which finding would SUPPORT Scientist 2's hypothesis?
💡 Show Solution
Solution:
Scientist 2's claim: Greenhouse gases cause climate change
Supporting evidence would:
- Show correlation between CO₂ and temperature
- Demonstrate greenhouse gas warming effect
- Rule out solar activity as primary cause
Examples of support:
- "Temperature increased as CO₂ levels rose"
- "Laboratory shows CO₂ traps heat"
- "Solar activity remained constant while temps rose"
Wrong answers would:
- Support Scientist 1 (solar activity correlation)
- Be irrelevant to either claim
- Weaken Scientist 2
Answer: Evidence showing a strong correlation between greenhouse gas levels and temperature increases
ACT Tip: Supporting evidence makes their prediction come true!
3Problem 3hard
❓ Question:
Two scientists propose different mechanisms for how birds navigate during migration:
Scientist 1: Birds use Earth's magnetic field Scientist 2: Birds use visual landmarks and the sun
Both scientists would likely agree that:
💡 Show Solution
Solution:
What they DISAGREE on:
- The mechanism (magnetic field vs. visual cues)
- How birds navigate
What they would AGREE on:
- Birds DO migrate (basic fact) ✓
- Migration is a real phenomenon ✓
- Birds can navigate long distances ✓
- Navigation involves some sensory input ✓
Common "both agree" answers involve:
- The phenomenon exists
- General observations
- Underlying assumptions
- Broader context
Answer: Birds successfully navigate long distances during migration
ACT Tip: "Both agree" answers are usually more GENERAL than each specific hypothesis!
Practice with Flashcards
Review key concepts with our flashcard system
Browse All Topics
Explore other calculus topics