It is a mistake to conclude

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong (conditional) / Opposite5% picked this

   To know the name of something is to know what that

   The author is actually trying to separate these two concepts. The author is driving home the point that we might know something even though we don’t know the name for it. He could similarly believe that someone might know the name for something without really knowing it.

   5%
2. B

   Irrelevant Comparison2% picked this

   People who first discover what something is know it better than do people who merely know the

   The author is only speaking in absolute language, about whether or not someone knows a thing / knows a name. There is no relative language that tip us off that in one situation you know better than in another situation.

   2%
3. C

   Too Strong: “can’t provide any”8% picked this

   The name or expression that is used to identify something cannot provide any information about the nature of

   The author isn’t saying that names are worthless when it comes to knowing things. She’s only saying that names aren’t necessary in order to know a thing.

   8%
4. D

   Correct71% picked this

   A person who repeatedly harvests from a wild fruit tree and studies it has some idea of what the fruit is even before

   Why this is right

   This completes the analogy. In each case, a person doesn’t have a word for something, but in each case the author believes that the person does still know what something is.

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

   71%
5. E

   Reversal14% picked this

   One need not know what something is before one can

   Close, but the author is assuming “One need not have a name for something before one can know what something is”. The author could believe that knowing comes first, naming comes second. In that case, one does need to know what something is before one can name it.

   14%