Human beings can exhibit complex,

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct65% picked this

   Complex, goal-oriented behavior requires

   Why this is right

   As we anticipated, the author presents the first sentence as an example in which intelligence is present, but consciousness is not. However, the first sentence doesn't mention intelligence. It instead just says "complex, goal-oriented behavior", so the author is assuming that such behavior involves intelligence. If we negated this answer, we'd have the notion that, "You can have complex, goal-oriented behavior without having intelligence". That would weaken the argument because the author's premise needs to establish there is intelligence but isn't consciousness. If the he uses a substitute concept for intelligence (complex, goal-oriented behavior), but that concept isn't a reliable indicator of intelligence, then the author's lone premise has dubious relevance to the conclusion.

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

   65%
2. B

   Not Assumed22% picked this

   The possession of consciousness does not imply the possession

   If we negated this and got, "having consciousness does guarantee that you have intelligence", would that weaken the argument? No. The author is saying "having intelligence doesn't guarantee that you have consciousness". He doesn't care if the converse of that is a guarantee. If I'm arguing that "establishing you have a rectangle does not establish that you have a square", you're not objecting to me by saying, "Nuh uh — establishing that you have a square guarantees that you have a rectangle". I agree with you. The logic does work in the direction you just stated, but not in the direction I stated.

   22%
3. C

   Too Strong: all3% picked this

   All forms of conscious behavior involve the exercise

   Did the author ever make a reasoning move from, this thing ? this thing has consciousness has intelligence ? No the only reasoning move the author made was from "this thing has complex, goal-oriented behavior" to "this thing has intelligence". If we negated this and said that "some forms of conscious behavior do not involve intelligence", that wouldn't hurt the author at all.

   3%
4. D

   Contradicts the Conclusion5% picked this

   The possession of intelligence entails the possession

   The conclusion is arguing the opposite of this. The conclusion is that "the possession of intelligence does not entail the possession of consciousness."

   5%
5. E

   Out of Scope: not complex5% picked this

   Some intelligent human behavior is neither complex

   The author is saying that humans can exhibit complex, goal-oriented behavior, so doesn't that mean that the author is also saying that sometimes we aren't exhibiting that behavior? Technically, no. We're never allowed to just assume a counterfactual. If I say "Some NFL players are men", you're not allowed to assume that I'm also saying "Some NFL players are not men". Beyond that, this specifically talking about intelligent human behavior. This author may agree that some human behavior is not complex and not goal-oriented, but disagree that any intelligent behavior lacks those traits. If we negate this, it's saying, "All intelligent human behavior is complex and goal-oriented". Would that hurt the argument? No, that would actually strengthen the argument, since the author currently has a missing link between the concepts of "intelligence" and "complex / goal-oriented behavior".

   5%