Over 90 percent of the human

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: always / easily3% picked this

   The argument presumes, without providing justification, that the effects of brain damage are

   This author wasn’t committed to the extreme assumption that the effects of brain damage are always easily detectable. If we negated this and said, “there are some rare cases when detecting the effects of brain damage are not easily detectable”, it wouldn’t hurt the argument in any way.

   3%
2. B

   Too Strong: the only / any6% picked this

   The argument presumes, without providing justification, that the only reason that any problem remains unsolved is a lack

   The author didn’t commit to the extreme position that the only reason any problem remains unsolved is a lack of creativity and innovation. The author is only assuming that “one of the reasons that some problems are currently unsolvable could be changed if we were able to tap into some of that unused brain power.

   6%
3. C

   Bad Evidence Match5% picked this

   The argument infers that certain parts of the brain do nothing merely on the basis of the assertion that we do

   When Flaw answers say the author “infers X on the basis of Y”, then the infers part should match a conclusion and the Y part should match the evidence. Did this author ever conclude that “certain parts of the brain do nothing”? Sure, she concluded that over 90% of the brain currently does nothing. Was her evidence for this the mere assertion that “we don’t know what over 90% of the brain does”? No, her evidence was that many people with bad brain damage show no discernible effects. This answer choice is describing an argument that sounds like, “We can’t figure out what over 90% of the brain does. Thus, over 90% of the brain does nothing.”

   5%
4. D

   Trap5% picked this

   The argument infers that problems will be solved merely on the basis of the claim that they will be

   Not Possible vs. Certain Bad Evidence Match This describes semi-famous flaw called Possible vs. Certain, because it’s saying the author made a move like, “Since some of our currently unsolvable problems will be within our ability to solve, we can conclude that these problems will get solved.” The author did infer that “problems will be solved”, but it was on the basis of the claim that “over 90% of brain currently serves no purpose”.

   5%
5. E

   Correct81% picked this

   The argument presumes, without providing justification, that the currently unused parts of the brain are a potential source

   Why this is right

   Does the author assume that the unused parts of the brain are a potential source of tremendous creativity and innovation? Sure. After all, she goes from saying that over 90% of the brain currently serves no purpose to saying “once humans begin to tap into this tremendous source of creativity and innovation”. The author never established that the unused portion of the brain is a tremendous source of creativity and innovation. She just assumes it is. If we negated this assumption, we’d be saying, “Yo, author — the unused parts of the brain are not a potential source of tremendous creativity and innovation”, which would definitely hurt the argument.

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

   81%