6. Which of the following, if true, would best serve to challenge Ogburn and Thomas's belief that the discovery of calculus is an example of the 'phenomenon' mentioned in the first sentence?
Answer: C
Finding a previously unknown letter between Newton and Leibniz discussing calculus that predated its commonly assumed discovery
This option directly challenges Ogburn and Thomas's belief by suggesting that the discovery of calculus may not have been an independent simultaneous occurrence but rather a collaborative effort. A letter between Newton and Leibniz could imply prior knowledge or communication about calculus, undermining the notion of it being an inevitable discovery.
A) Uncovering the existence of a journal that Newton kept while working with calculus
While this might provide deeper insight into Newton's thought process, it does not indicate whether his discovery was independent or influenced by others. The existence of a journal alone does not challenge the idea of simultaneous discovery; it could merely document Newton's own development of calculus.
B) Learning that scientists other than Newton and Leibniz had also made substantial progress on calculus
This option suggests that multiple individuals were working on similar ideas, which aligns with the concept of simultaneous discovery. However, it does not directly challenge Ogburn and Thomas's claim, as it still supports the idea that the discovery was in the intellectual climate of the time.
C) Finding a previously unknown letter between Newton and Leibniz discussing calculus that predated its commonly assumed discovery
This option is the most effective challenge to Ogburn and Thomas's belief. It suggests that rather than being an independent discovery, calculus could have been influenced by prior communication, directly contradicting the notion of its inevitability and independence.
D) Identifying a minor error in Newton's original mathematical calculations
Identifying an error does not challenge the phenomenon of simultaneous discovery. Mistakes in calculation do not affect the validity of the idea that discoveries can occur independently; they simply reflect the imperfection of the process. This option does not address the central claim about the inevitability of the discovery itself.
Conclusion
Option C is the strongest challenge to Ogburn and Thomas's belief regarding the simultaneous discovery of calculus, as it introduces the possibility of prior communication between Newton and Leibniz. In contrast, the other options either support the idea of simultaneous discovery or do not address the independence of the discoveries, thus failing to undermine the core concept being tested.