Correct Option (B)
The passage presents a scientist's perspective acknowledging the inherent limitations of scientific inquiry in addressing profound existential questions, such as the origin of existence or humanity's purpose. For these specific domains, the scientist posits that faith offers a more suitable pathway to answers. The passage explicitly challenges the contemporary societal presumption that scientific and spiritual viewpoints are inherently incompatible, suggesting instead that they can be mutually complementary when their distinct spheres of investigation are appropriately understood and respected.
Incorrect Options:
The passage does not assert that faith alone possesses the capacity to resolve all problems confronting humanity. Its focus is specifically on faith providing answers to certain fundamental, existential questions that lie beyond the purview of scientific methodology.
The passage directly contradicts this statement by indicating that faith provides a "better path to answers" for fundamental questions that science cannot address. It does not suggest a complete inability of both domains to offer insights into such questions.
While the passage notes a "widespread presumption that scientific and spiritual views are incompatible," which might imply a societal bias, the most logical and rational inference is not merely an observation of this cultural trend. Instead, the core message is the potential for science and faith to be complementary, despite this perceived incompatibility. The statement about incompatibility serves as a premise for the argument for complementarity.