Economist: In order to decide what

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match12% picked this

   uses evidence that the monetary value of a particular natural resource is less than a certain amount in order to establish that the monetary

   This answer has the form, "Uses evidence that X in order to establish that Y", so we would want to check to see whether X matches the evidence and Y matches the conclusion. Did the evidence say that the monetary value of a particular natural resource is less than a certain amount? Yes, the Intermediate Conclusion (which is evidence for the Main Conclusion) said that the monetary value of the ozone layer is less than the combined total of the world's economic resources. Does the conclusion say that, "The value of any natural resource is less than the combined total of the world's economic resources"? No. The conclusion says, "The ozone layer has a calculable monetary value".

   12%
2. B

   Not Circular3% picked this

   presupposes that the ozone layer should not be protected and then argues to that claim

   When we see language like, "the premise restates the conclusion" or "the premise assumes the truth of the conclusion", that means Circular reasoning. We know that Circular Reasoning is almost always wrong, so we would never "guess" it's circular. We'd be safer guessing elsewhere. This answer is saying that the author "presupposes claim X and then argues that claim as a conclusion", so it's saying he presupposed the conclusion. Also, it's not even true that the author ever assumed that the ozone layer should not be protected. And the conclusion sounds nothing like that. It's talking about whether the ozone layer has a calculable monetary value.

   3%
3. C

   No Ambiguity12% picked this

   takes advantage of an ambiguity in the term “value” to deflect

   When we see a term in "quotes" in a Flaw answer, we generally assume that answer is describing one of the 10 Famous Flaws, Equivocation, in which the argument uses the same term/concept multiple times but with very different meanings. This answer choice is almost always wrong. There was no ambiguity in how the environmentalists used the term "value". They argued that "the ozone layer does not have a calculable monetary value". It's very clear what is meant by that ... can you put a specific price tag or dollar amount on how much the ozone layer is worth? The author doesn't drift from that concept of 'value'.

   12%
4. D

   Correct69% picked this

   gives no reason for thinking that merely establishing an upper limit on a certain monetary value would allow the

   Why this is right

   The common phrasings for Assumption answers on Flaw are presumes / takes for granted that X. Less common phrasings are fails to establish / gives no reason for thinking that X. Was this author assuming that "establishing an upper limit on a certain monetary value allows the calculation of that monetary value"? Yes. The author's reasoning was, "if the ozone layer is worth less than X, then the ozone layer has a calculable monetary value". Said differently, the author is assuming, "if the ozone layer has a clear upper limit of monetary value, then we can calculate the ozone layer's value". And as we were arguing, "just because we can set an upper limit on how much the ozone layer is worth doesn't mean that we can calculate how much it's worth". If we're going through our dead relative's estate and find an antique necklace, we could set an upper limit ("this is definitely worth less than one billion dollars") but that doesn't mean we can actually calculate how much that antique necklace is worth.

   Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   69%
5. E

   Contradicted: does not address5% picked this

   does not directly address the argument of

   This argument explicitly addresses the environmentalists' argument. They argued that "the ozone layer does not have a calculable monetary value", and the author's argument concludes by saying, "the ozone layer does have a calculable monetary value."

   5%