Herpetologist: Some psychologists attributecomplex

Answer choices

1. A

   Illegal Negation19% picked this

   Animals could make major changes in their behavior only if they were capable

   The conditional indicators only if / only always indicates the necessary condition that goes on the right side of the arrow. (the only indicates a sufficient) So this is saying capable of major → capable of alterations in behavior complex reasoning That's an illegal negation of the argument, which went incapable of major → incapable of alterations in behavior complex reasoning Knowing our conditional logic is the easiest way to see this is a bad answer. Otherwise, we have to conversationally understand that in the original argument the author was assuming, "every thing that's capable of complex reasoning can make major alterations in its behavior", whereas this answer is saying "only things that are capable of complex reasoning can make major alterations in their behavior".

   19%
2. B

   Too Strong2% picked this

   Simple stimulus-response explanations can in principle account for all

   Too Strong: all Doesn't Mention New Concept The fact that this doesn't mention "complex reasoning" means we wouldn't bother reading it if we were just scanning for the New Concept in the Conclusion. But if we do read it, we could say that the author definitely hasn't committed herself to what type of explanation can account for all reptile behaviors. This answer is trying the What Next? trap, where it baits students into thinking, "If the author believes their conclusion is true, what's the next thing the author might think on the basis of that"? Here's that's taking the form of thinking, "If someone believes it's true that reptiles are incapable of complex reasoning, then they probably believe that stimulus-response explains all reptile behavior." That's way too harsh a move. We don't have to assume that the only two ways to explain behavior are complex reasoning or stimulus-response.

   2%
3. C

   Weakens Relative vs. Absolute0% picked this

   Reptile behavior appears more complex in the field than laboratory experiments reveal

   If we were scanning for the New Concept in the Conclusion we might be tempted to give this the green light, since it mentions "complex". But we're looking for "complex reasoning", and this is saying "more complex behavior". That's not at all a match. If we actually read this answer, we'd see that it goes against the author's argument. The author never assumes something that goes against their argument. She's arguing that reptiles don't have complex reasoning, and this answer seems to be retorting, "Actually, reptile behavior is more complex than you think it is."

   0%
4. D

   Correct72% picked this

   If reptiles were capable of complex reasoning, they would sometimes be able to make major

   Why this is right

   The reasoning move from Premise to Conclusion was incapable of major → incapable of alterations in behavior complex reasoning By contrapositive, the author was thinking capable of → capable of major complex reasoning alterations in behavior This answer is saying exactly that. On harder questions where we're being tested on a Missing Link, we know that there are often illegal reversals / negations masquerading as the correct answer (and usually placed higher in the set of answers). Meanwhile, the correct answer is disguised in contrapositive form. That's why when we first articulate the "If Premise, then Conclusion" link we want, it's also beneficial to say the contrapositive version of that to ourselves as well.

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

   72%
5. E

   Too Strong: can't both contribute7% picked this

   Complex reasoning and responses to stimuli cannot both contribute to the

   While ruling out language like "not" is very often part of correct answers on Necessary Assumption, if we negate this answer it doesn't weaken the argument, because it's speaking about a group of animals way broader than just reptiles. complex reasoning and responses to stimuli can both contribute to the same behavior The author is fine agreeing that there are times when complex reasoning and responses to stimuli combine. She would only say, "That's never the case with reptiles, since they don't have complex reasoning."

   7%