It is highly likely that

Answer choices

1. A

   Not an Objection2% picked this

   ignores the possibility that Claudette is more familiar with the works of other composers of

   When a Flaw answer choice begins with fails to consider / ignores the possibility, we can ask ourselves whether the idea that follows would weaken. It's not any objection to the argument to say that Claudette knows other composers better than Clara Schumann. The argument wasn't assuming that Claudette knew Clara Schumann better than other composers. The argument was only saying that Claudette recognizes many of Clara Schumann's works, whereas the vast majority of people who aren't classical pianists don't recognize her works.

   2%
2. B

   Not an Assumption21% picked this

   presumes, without providing justification, that people who have not heard of Clara Schumann do not

   When a Flaw answer choice begins with presumes / takes for granted, we can ask ourselves whether the author had to assume the idea that follows. One red flag suggesting that this answer is not a crucial assumption is that it has nothing to do with Claudette, who is the centerpiece of the argument. Does the author need to assume that any person who hasn't heard of Clara Schumann doesn't recognize her works? No, it doesn't matter if some people recognize her music but haven't heard her name. We probably can all remember instances where we've heard a song but don't know who wrote it and might not recognize the name if we heard it.

   21%
3. C

   Not an Assumption0% picked this

   presumes, without providing justification, that classical pianists cannot also play other

   Does the author need to assume that any person who is a classical pianist cannot play other instruments? No, that's too strong and not relevant. If classical pianists can also play other instruments, does that hurt the argument? Does that give us a way to say, "See? Claudette probably isn't a classical pianist." No, because if you're a classical pianist who also plays the oboe, you're still a classical pianist.

   0%
4. D

   Not Equivocation1% picked this

   relies for its plausibility on the vagueness of the

   When we see a Flaw answer choice saying that the author used a "term" in two different ways, that's the famous flaw called Equivocation (which is almost never the right answer). This argument was using "classical" in a perfectly consistent, comprehensible way. It just referred to the "classical" period / style of music (Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, etc.)

   1%
5. E

   Correct76% picked this

   ignores the possibility that the majority of people who recognize many of Clara Schumann’s works

   Why this is right

   When a Flaw answer choice begins with fails to consider / ignores the possibility, we can ask ourselves whether the idea that follows would weaken. Does it hurt the argument to say that "most people who recognize many of Clara Schumann's works are not classical pianists"? Yes! If we combine this answer with the premise ... Claudette recognizes many of Clara Schumann's works. + Most people who recognize many of Clara Schumann's works are not classical pianists. ... together, that suggests that Claudette is probably not a classical pianist (our anti-conclusion). We could pick this answer simply by understanding that, if true, it would weaken the argument. This answer, though, does address the mistaken Most reversal we talked about. The author was trying to make this argument: 1. Claudette recognizes Clara Schumann 2. Most who recognize Clara Schumann are classical pianists Thus, Claudette is probably a classical pianist But the author never supplied #2 as a premise (he gave us the reversal of that instead). This answer choice is simply saying the author fails to consider that this #2 idea, which he needs for his argument, might not be true.

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

   76%