Because no other theory has been able to predict it so simply and accurately, ... ...

Because no other theory has been able to predict it so simply and accurately, the advance of the perihelion of Mercury is sometimes cited as evidence in support of Einstein’s theory of general relativity. However, this phenomenon was already well known when Einstein developed his theory, and he quite probably adjusted his equations to generate the correct numbers for the perihelion advance. Therefore, accounting for this advance should not be counted as evidence in support of Einstein’s theory. Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the argument above?
(A) Unless a phenomenon predicted by a scientific theory is unknown at the time the theory is developed, the theory should not be credited with the discovery of that phenomenon.
(B) ...
(C) ...
(D) ...
(E) ...

*This question is included in June 2013 LSAT (PT69): Logical Reasoning B

Post a new discussion thread