IMAT 2016 Q5 [Conclusion | Identifying Objects]

In 1688 the Irish philosopher William Molyneux asked whether a blind person who regained their vision could recognise by sight an object they had previously only known by touch. Richard Held and Pawan Sinha of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology attempted to answer this question in an experiment with five children in India who had just had successful surgery which gave them their sight for the first time. Within 48 hours of the operation the children were asked to feel a toy block without looking at it. They were then shown two blocks, one of which they had touched. They identified the orginal block just over half of the time and this is only a little better than guesswork. Recognising touched objects by sight alone improved within days.

Which one of the following can be drawn as a conclusion of the above passage?

A. Using children in experiments such as the one described above is morally wrong.

B. Identifying an object by sight alone which had been touched but not seen previously is learned behaviour and not innate.

C. Identifying an object by sight alone which had been touched but not seen previously is innate behaviour and not learned.

D. Identifying an object by sight alone which had been touched but not seen previously is something which adults do better than children.

E. Identifying an object by sight alone which had been touched but not seen previously is something which children do better than adults.