When a nation is on the brink

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct93% picked this

   tries to show that a set of principles is limited in a specific way by using an analogy to a similar principle that

   Why this is right

   Yes, the author tries to show that free-market principles are limited in a certain way (can't rapidly withdraw money when system is on verge of collapse) by using the analogy that free-speech principles are limited (can't yell "Fire!" in crowded theater). They are limited in similar ways in that both limitations are an attempt to avoid potential harm.

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

   93%
2. B

   Bad Premise Match1% picked this

   infers a claim by arguing that the truth of that claim would best

   Does the author's conclusion infer a claim? Sure. That's so generic that it would apply to all conclusions. Does the evidence say, "After all, if this claim were true, it would offer the best explanation for something we've observed?" Heavens no. There are no observed facts in this argument. It's all hypothetical / theoretical stuff.

   1%
3. C

   Bad Premise Match0% picked this

   presents numerous experimental results as evidence for a

   Does the author provide numerous experimental results? Not even close. Nothing here is empirical. It's all just theoretical / hypothetical ideas.

   0%
4. D

   Bad Conclusion + Premise Match2% picked this

   attempts to demonstrate that an explanation of a phenomenon is flawed by showing that it fails to explain a

   Does the author's conclusion try to show that someone's explanation for a phenomenon is flawed? Not at all. An explanation for a phenomenon means that something happened and someone has proposed a causal story for why it happened. Nothing in this argument "happened". There are no past tense, real world facts. It's just an abstract debate about hypothetical's and political philosophy. We don't need to keep reading, but the premise also doesn't match, since there are no particular instances of a government limiting foreigners from withdrawing their money mentioned in the evidence.

   2%
5. E

   Bad Conclusion + Premise Match4% picked this

   applies an empirical generalization to reach a conclusion about a

   Does the author reach a conclusion about a particular case? No, she reaches a conclusion about a whole category of hypothetical cases --- "whenever governments are considering limiting the rate at which foreigners can withdraw money from an imperiled economy".

   4%