Passage Summary:

Reasoning: Pulford claims scientific inquiry into health history is only valid if motivated by science rather than curiosity; Varela counters that curiosity is actually the fundamental source of scientific inquiry.

Analysis: Varela's strategy is to attack the distinction Pulford tries to draw between 'scientific inquiry' and 'mere curiosity.' By arguing that curiosity is the 'root' of science, Varela suggests that Pulford’s requirement is impossible to satisfy because the two motivations are inextricably linked. When looking for the correct description of this method, focus on how Varela undermines Pulford's premise by showing that the two categories overlap or are essentially the same thing.