To predict that a device

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope: "counterexample"2% picked this

   constructing a counterexample to a general hypothesis about

   Counterexamples are specific people/place/things/situations that go against a general rule. There is no general rule in this conversation, nor any specifically named people/place/thing/situation trying to go against that general rule.

   2%
2. B

   Correct60% picked this

   appealing to definitions to infer the impossibility of a kind

   Why this is right

   Is the conclusion an inference about "an impossible kind of occurrence"? Sure, the conclusion is saying that "predicting an invention will never occur (it's self-contradictory)". Is the evidence an appeal to definitions? Sure. The first sentence defines what it means to "predict a device will be invented". The last claim defines what "inventing means".

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

   60%
3. C

   Out of Scope: "hypothesis"24% picked this

   countering a hypothesis by indicating the falsehood of the implications of

   There's no hypothesis anywhere here. A hypothesis is a claim that attempts to explain a given phenomenon. There's no phenomenon that has occurred nor any explanation for why it occurred. Even if we considered the principle / notion / proposition in the first sentence as a hypothesis, that first idea gets countered by showing that it's self-contradictory, which is not the same as showing that it has false implications. "False implications" would be like, "If X were true, then Y would follow. But since Y is false, X must be wrong." Y, in that example, was the false implication. That's not the same as showing that a claim is internally contradictory. To be self-contradictory, you are saying "there's no way both of these things could be simultaneously true", but that's dealing with the claim itself, not an implication of the claim.

   24%
4. D

   Out of Scope: "scientific vs. conceptual"1% picked this

   pointing out how a problem is widely thought to be scientific yet

   Nothing in this paragraph talks about a problem that is widely thought to be scientific.

   1%
5. E

   Opposite13% picked this

   attempting to show that predicting any event implies that it has in fact

   The author is saying the opposite of this in his final claim: you cannot predict something that has already taken place. The author thinks that predicting an event implies that the event has NOT yet taken place.

   13%