I chose option (A) here because it matches with the fact that althoght there is some experiment that confims the area theory, it is not valid for the exception case- and that exception case has some sort of evidence (around differential patterns) which can explain different mental experience.
I elimniated (D) because the author does cite atleast some, although not very strong explanation of diversity of mental experience.
Can you please help me understand why this logic is wrong?
‘There is some evidence for this view’ —> author not convinced that this explanation is good
‘However……..turned out to have little explanatory value’ —> author definitely not convinced about this explanation
Why D is correct: Sure, there are examples (marked) to support it, but it fails to explain the diversity of mental experience (Studies showed that…….effects in brain excitation).
Why A is wrong: Sure, it is a plausible explanation BUT it cannot be proved because you have evidence against it. (However, cortical…………… the entirety of this paragraph).
Ahh! Much more now from your explanation on why A is wrong, I had missed the link that since there exists contradictory evidence to a theory, it CANNOT be proved correct.
