The average 40-year-old North American

Answer choices

1. A

   Strengthens, Doesn't Prove5% picked this

   The habits of thought that people develop are largely determined by

   Given that TV ads are an external influence and we're trying to prove that TV ads have influenced habits of thought, it strengthens to hear that habits of thought are largely determined by external influences. But this answer doesn't prove that one specific external influences, namely TV commercials, have influenced the habits of thought of North Americans.

   5%
2. B

   Correct80% picked this

   Anything people are exposed to in great quantity will influence their

   Why this is right

   This has that lovably strong, absolute language we want in Sufficient Assumption, since our goal is to guarantee the conclusion. This is also a conditional rule that has the conclusion on the right side of the arrow, where we want it: if people have been exposed then X will to X in great quantity ? influence their habits of thought Does this rule apply to North Americans and commercials? Have North Americans been exposed to TV commercials in great quantity? Sure, I mean the average 40 year old has seen 1 million. So then according to this rule, TV commercials will influence the average 40 year old's habits of thought. Thus we've proven that the TV commercial has influenced some North American habits of thought.

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

   80%
3. C

   Unrelated to Goal2% picked this

   It is impossible to avoid or ignore

   If the answer doesn't say "habits of thought" or a meaning match for that, it's functionally useless to us. The correct answer + the existing evidence must allow us to logically derive the conclusion. We can't derive "habits of thought" unless it appears in the correct answer or in the existing premises. It didn't appear in the premises, so it must appear in the correct answer.

   2%
4. D

   Unrelated to Goal0% picked this

   Some people find television commercials more interesting to watch than the

   If the answer doesn't say "habits of thought" or a meaning match for that (i.e. "tendencies of thinking"), it's functionally useless to us. The correct answer + the existing evidence must allow us to logically derive the conclusion. We can't derive "habits of thought" unless it appears in the correct answer or in the existing premises. It didn't appear in the premises, so it must appear in the correct answer.

   0%
5. E

   Strengthens, Doesn't Prove12% picked this

   Certain forms of communication to which people are subjected will affect their

   Just like (A), given that TV ads are form of communication to which people are subjected, and given that we're trying to prove that TV ads have influenced habits of thought, it strengthens to hear that habits of thought can be affected by certain forms of communication people are subjected to. But this answer doesn't prove that one specific external influences, namely TV commercials, have influenced the habits of thought of North Americans. Sufficient Assumption is asking for us to 100% guarantee the conclusion, not just make it somewhat more likely to be true.

   12%