Editorialist: Society is obligated

Answer choices

1. A

   Wrong Flaw16% picked this

   assumes what it is trying to

   This describes the famous Circular reasoning flaw, in which the evidence restates the conclusion or assumes the truth of the conclusion. The conclusion is that "there is no reason not to grant 17 year olds the privileges of adulthood". Was there a premise that also said "we should grant 17 year olds the privileges of adulthood"? No. So it's not circular.

   16%
2. B

   Wrong Flaw10% picked this

   too hastily reaches a general conclusion on the basis of a

   This describes the famous Sampling flaw, in which an argument relies on a sample that is too small, or potentially biased / unrepresentative. Is the conclusion general? Sure, it's about all 17 year olds. Is the evidence a few examples of 17 year olds? Nope.

   10%
3. C

   Correct61% picked this

   equivocates with respect to a central

   Why this is right

   To equivocate is to be deliberately misleading with language. Any time we see an Equivocation flaw, it will mean the author was "cheating" by using the same word in two completely different senses. This answer is usually wrong, but if you can find an idea and define it two different ways, then go for it! 1st use of "Mature" --- is someone grown up enough intellectually and morally 2nd use of "Mature" --- is someone done with the physiological process of developing

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

   61%
4. D

   Wrong Flaw9% picked this

   too readily accepts a claim by appeal to

   This describes the famous Inappropriate Appeal (to Authority) flaw, in which the evidence cites and relies on an opinion that isn't shown to be qualified on the issue at hand. The author cites the opinion of "science", but they are definitely qualified to weigh in on when physiological development is complete. Science wouldn't be a good source for ascertaining whether someone is intellectually or morally complete, but physiology is definitely in its area of expertise.

   9%
5. E

   Not an Objection4% picked this

   ignores the fact that some people are mature at

   Does it hurt the argument to say that "some people are mature at age 16"? Nope. By the author's logic, she would say go ahead and grant them the privileges of adulthood, too. That doesn't go against her conclusion in any way because she never said "Only give the privileges of adulthood to 17 year olds!"

   4%