<p>Passage 2:
A tension exists in psychology between those who believe that the most valuable lessons about the brain can be learned from statistical analysis involving large numbers of patients and those who believe that doing the right kind of experiments on the right patients can yield much more useful information. This is really a silly debate since its resolution is obvious: it is a good idea to begin with experiments on single cases and then to confirm the findings through studies of additional patients. By way of analogy, imagine that I show you a pig tell you that it can talk. You might say, "Oh, really? Show me." I then wave my wand and the pig starts talking. You are not likely to ask,"Ah, but that's just one pig. Show me a few more and then I might believe you." Yet this is precisely the attitude of many people in my field .</p>
<p>Question:
The analogy in lines 23-28 Primarily serves to :
a) illustrates the ridiculous nature of the reasoning exhibited by some psychologists
b) highlight the resolution of two seemingly opposing points of view
c) point out the shortcomings in both of the views described at the beginning of the paragraph
d) show the importance of statistical analyses .</p>
<p>right answer a)
why not b）</p>