Anna: Did you know that rainbows

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match / Not Straw Man1% picked this

   inappropriately distorts Anna's conclusion, making it appear more extreme than it

   William doesn't distort Anna's conclusion. He doesn't really even take it head-on. He just tries to invalidate Pliny as a source of true beliefs, given that he has previously been a source of false beliefs. This answer choice describes a flaw people call Straw Man. Karen: The minimum wage hasn't risen in the past ten years, while cost of living goes up 2% per year. Thus, we should raise the minimum wage. Patrick: Well, I don't think we should just give free money to everyone. People need to be encouraged to work their way past entry level jobs that pay minimum wages.

   1%
2. B

   Trap1% picked this

   takes for granted that Pliny the Elder was in bad faith when he reported

   Too Strong / Out of Scope: "bad faith" William is assuming that Pliny was incorrect when he reported about unheard-of creatures, but he doesn't need to assume that Pliny was acting in bad faith, i.e. lying about them. Pliny might be a guy that hears bad info, genuinely believes it, and passes it on in good faith. William would still say, "His track record sucks. Let's not believe him when it comes to rainbows."

   1%
3. C

   Correct97% picked this

   illicitly infers that, because Pliny the Elder made some incorrect assertions, Pliny the Eider's assertions about

   Why this is right

   When a Flaw answer choice is structured in two parts, representing the Premise to Conclusion/Assumption move, we can just try matching it up. The author infers that, because [premise], [conclusion]. Is the premise that Pliny made some incorrect assertions? Yes, essentially. Is the conclusion that Pliny's assertions about rainbows are also wrong? Yes.

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

   97%
4. D

   Bad Premise Match0% picked this

   accepts the assertions of an ancient scholar without presenting contemporary verification of

   William does not accept the assertions of Pliny as being valid. He is presenting them as obviously-false ideas, so we're not mad at William for failing to get contemporary science to sign off on Pliny's crazy ideas.

   0%
5. E

   Bad Premise Match0% picked this

   implies that Pliny the Eider's writings are too outdated to be

   The author isn't saying, "Don't listen to Pliny, he's too old to be valuable." He's saying, "Don't listen to Pliny, he's said too many crazy things to be trusted."

   0%