The modularity hypothesis proposes that the mind consists of specialized modules—face recognition, language processing, spatial navigation—that evolved for specific tasks. Evidence includes the existence of very specific deficits, like prosopagnosia (inability to recognize faces while other visual processing remains intact). Critics argue that the brain's neural plasticity undermines strict modularity; after damage, other regions can sometimes assume lost functions.
It can be inferred from the text that
understanding brain organization may require integrating evidence of both specialization and flexibility
the brain has no specialized functions
neural plasticity is irrelevant to cognitive science
prosopagnosia proves that all mental functions are modular
Correct Answer: A
Choice A is the best answer. Both specialized deficits and plastic compensation exist.
- Context clues: Evidence supports modules (specific deficits); evidence supports plasticity (functional takeover).
- Meaning: Neither extreme captures the full picture—integration is needed.
- Verify: Both modularity and plasticity have empirical support.
💡 Strategy: When evidence supports seemingly contradictory positions, infer that both must be integrated.
Choice B is incorrect because prosopagnosia shows specialized face recognition exists. Choice C is incorrect because critics use plasticity as important counter-evidence. Choice D is incorrect because prosopagnosia shows one module, not that all functions are modular.