Commentator: Human behavior cannot be

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong18% picked this

   No support is offered for its conclusion other than an analogy that relates only superficially to

   Too Strong: only superficially Out of Scope: analogy The support isn't an analogy. It's more like a thought experiment. The author isn't giving us a related situation that has the same principle as the conversation we're having. The author is giving us a hypothetical situation to ponder, in order to discuss the conversation we're having. And saying it relates only superficially doesn't seem right. It seems to relate completely. The conclusion is about whether or not we need to appeal to nonphysical aspects to fully understand human behavior, and the thought experiment is about whether or not we would fully understand this human action if we knew every physical aspect.

   18%
2. B

   Correct64% picked this

   The purported evidence that it cites in support of its conclusion presumes that the

   Why this is right

   When a Flaw answer says that the evidence is a restatement of the conclusion or that the evidence presumes the truth of the conclusion, it's alluding to the famous Circular reasoning flaw. A circular argument doesn't really have a premise. The author says "Clinton was the best President, because no President was better than Clinton". If you accept the premise, then you have to accept the conclusion, because they're pretty much one in the same. If we accept the premise that, "even with a complete physical account, you still wouldn't truly understand a human action", then we have no way to fight the conclusion, which is saying "a physical account of a human action is not enough to fully understand it". Someone who doesn't believe that we need to refer to thoughts / mind / soul to explain human actions would think that if we have a complete physical account of an action then we do truly comprehend it. The author only thinks that even with all that we still wouldn't comprehend it because she is presuming that her conclusion is true. Answer choices for Circular arguments appear all the time on Flaw, but actual circular arguments are crazy rare (maybe 3 or 4 ever). So enjoy this one!

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

   64%
3. C

   Wrong Flaw: Unproven vs. Proven False10% picked this

   It concludes that a proposition must be true merely on the grounds that it has

   This refers to one of the other ten Famous flaws. The author does conclude a proposition is true in some sense. The proposition would be "human behavior can't be fully understood on a purely physical level". Does the evidence say, "People have never been able to prove that human behavior can be fully understood on a purely physical level"? No, it's nothing like that. It doesn't address anyone's efforts to prove the opposite claim.

   10%
4. D

   Not a Flaw2% picked this

   It fails to indicate whether the speaker is aware of any evidence that could

   We don't really require of authors that they announce whether or not they're aware of any evidence that could undermine their conclusion. If we take a famous, valid argument like, "All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Thus, Socrates is mortal", that argument failed to indicate whether the speaker is aware of any evidence that could undermine the conclusion. But we aren't going to criticize the reasoning of the argument because of that. After all, the reasoning is fine!

   2%
5. E

   Too Strong: any6% picked this

   It presumes, without providing justification, that science can provide a complete account of

   This argument definitely does not commit itself to the crazy extreme idea that science can provide a complete account of any physical phenomenon. The author is just presenting a hypothetical thought experiment. She says, "Suppose we can a complete account of X". The author isn't saying that science actually can provide a complete account of X. She's just saying, "suppose it could. pretend, for the sake of argument, that it could." And she's only talking about complete accounts of human actions -- this answer accuses her of committing to the idea that science can provide a complete account of quantum gravity, hiccups, yawning, each of Earth's five mass extinctions, etc.

   6%