Scientist: To study the comparative

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct82% picked this

   The reporter concludes from evidence showing only that M can cure athlete's foot that M

   Why this is right

   The scientist's evidence does establish that M can cure athlete's foot. After all, "the only people who athlete's foot was cured were given M". But the reporter takes it to another level. When she illegally reverses the conditional and turns it into this, Your AF wasn't cured ? You weren't given M then by contrapositive, she is saying You were given M ? Your AF was cured That contrapositive could be read as, "All people given M had their athlete's foot cured". Conversationally, if she's saying that anyone who's AF wasn't cured must have been in group N, she must be thinking that everyone who was in group M had their AF cured.

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

   82%
2. B

   Bad Conclusion Match3% picked this

   The reporter illicitly draws a conclusion about the population as a whole on the basis of a study conducted only on

   The reporter's conclusion is not about on the population as a whole. It's only talking about people in the study. "This means, then that if anyone in the study ..."

   3%
3. C

   Not Assumed: available outside study0% picked this

   The reporter presumes, without providing justification, that medications M and N are available to people who have athlete's foot but did

   The reporter is only talking about people in the study, so she's not assuming anything about what is or isn't available to people outside the study.

   0%
4. D

   Not an Objection9% picked this

   The reporter fails to allow for the possibility that athlete's foot may be cured even if neither of the

   Would it hurt the reporter's claim if we said, "It's possible to cure athlete's foot without using M or N"? No. We can only hurt the reporter's claim by saying, "Some people in the study had athlete's foot that wasn't cured and did receive medication M".

   9%
5. E

   Not Assumed: people outside study6% picked this

   The reporter presumes, without providing justification, that there is no sizeable subgroup of people whose athlete's foot will be cured only if

   The reporter's conclusion is solely about people in the study, so she isn't assuming anything about people in the general population. If we negated this purported assumption and said, "There is a sizeable subgroup of people whose athlete's foot will be cured only if they don't take M", that doesn't hurt the reporter at all. She's only talking about people in the study whose athlete's foot wasn't cured.

   6%