Solution
The correct answer is option 4. The question asks which statement, if false, would NOT contradict the passage. A statement whose falsity would not contradict the passage is one that already contradicts it; making it false would actually align with the passage. Option 4 claims humans do not interact with places in subjective, emotional ways because places are only physical topography. This directly opposes the second paragraph, which states that geographical places have "a spiritual or emotional component" and that this subjective dimension is no less real than a surveyor's map. Since option 4 already contradicts the passage, its being false would confirm the passage rather than contradict it, making it the correct EXCEPT choice.
Option 1 is wrong as a choice for EXCEPT (it matches the passage). The first paragraph explicitly links "highly vivid" writing and "the language of the senses" to how humans know physical space, while the second paragraph describes consciousness of place as "multi-modal." If this claim were false, it would contradict those points.
Option 2 is wrong as a choice for EXCEPT (it matches the passage). The second paragraph argues that the emotional component of place is no less real than a surveyor's map, implying that written or narrative descriptions can convey a real sense of place without requiring visual scientific aids. Falsifying this would oppose the passage's stance.
Option 3 is wrong as a choice for EXCEPT (it matches the passage). The third paragraph identifies "movement and migration" among the perspectives that concern cultural geographers, and the passage throughout argues literature yields valuable insight into such geographical concerns. Denying this would contradict the passage's argument.