The familiar slogan “survival of

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: all3% picked this

   All claims that are of scientific interest

   Since this is conditional, we can ask ourselves whether the author ever made this reasoning move: if X is of scientific interest ? X is informative No, she didn't. Both of those terms appear for the first time in the conclusion. She isn't moving from one of those ideas in the Premise to the other idea in the Conclusion. Another way to say it's wrong: if we negated this and said, "Yo, author -- there is at least one claim that is of scientific interest that is not informative", it wouldn't weaken her argument in the slightest, since her argument is about a claim that supposedly is neither of scientific interest nor informative.

   3%
2. B

   Too Strong: only Bad Trigger Match1% picked this

   Only claims that are true are of

   Since this is conditional, we can ask ourselves whether the author ever made this reasoning move: if X is not true ? X is not of scientific interest No, she didn't. She does try to conclude that something is not of scientific interest, so the right side is fine, but she didn't say that "this claim is not true". In fact, she said the opposite. This claim is clearly true. Would it hurt the author's argument if there was a false claim that was of scientific interest? Nope.

   1%
3. C

   Too Strong: seldom13% picked this

   Popular slogans are seldom informative or of

   This argument is only about one popular slogan. Our author thinks that this slogan isn't informative or of scientific interest, but there's no reason she has to assume that most popular slogans are that way, which is what this answer choice says.

   13%
4. D

   Too Strong: cannot10% picked this

   Informative scientific claims cannot use terms in the way they are

   This is very strong language. Informative scientific claims never use terms the way they are popularly used? The author is only trying to prove that this claim, which is popularly used, is not informative. She doesn't need to assume any permanent connection between being scientifically informative and being popularly used. If we negated this and said that, "informative scientific claims can use terms the way they are popularly used", that wouldn't hurt this argument at all.

   10%
5. E

   Correct72% picked this

   The truth of a purported scientific claim is not sufficient for it to be

   Why this is right

   We would guess this answer purely from strength of language, if we had to take a 10 second guess by looking at the answers. Saying that "X is not sufficient for Y" is merely saying "It's possible that X is true and Y is not true". Did this author think it's possible that - a purported scientific claim is true and - the claim is not of scientific interest ? Definitely! Her final sentence says this claim is true and is not of scientific interest. If we negated this, would it weaken: "The truth of a claim is sufficient for it to be of scientific interest"? Definitely! This negation would end up contradicting part of the author's conclusion. She concedes that this claim is true, so according to the negation, that would prove that the claim is of scientific interest. And yet she's trying to conclude the opposite of that. Overall, this is a weird question. The answer ends up feeling more like a thought you can derive / infer from the author claims, rather than a claim that fills in a reasoning gap. But like every single Necessary Assumption question, if we went by the standard of "Which answer, when negated, most weakens", we could still get this right.

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

   72%