Doctor: Medical researchers recently

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Premise Match18% picked this

   A factor that need not be present in order for a certain effect to arise may nonetheless be

   This is tempting. If it said "A factor that sometimes doesn't present a certain effect to arise may nonetheless be sufficient to produce that effect in other cases", it would match. Our evidence is about people who had the Cause (bad disks) but not the Effect. Saying "a factor need not be present in order for an effect to arise" is referring to a case in which you had the Effect, but not the Cause. If this argument had been, "These people who have back pain don't have bad disks. Thus bad disks can't cause back pain", then this answer would have matched.

   18%
2. B

   Correct61% picked this

   A factor that is not in itself sufficient to produce a certain effect may nonetheless be partly responsible for

   Why this is right

   These answers, formally, are just trying to say, "Your PREM can be true, even if your CONC is false." In the Premise, a factor (bad disk) was not itself sufficient to produce an effect (back pain). But that factor (bad disk) may nonetheless be partly responsible for creating back pain in some instances (which would contradict the conclusion).

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

   61%
3. C

   Bad Conclusion Match Bad Premise Match4% picked this

   An effect that occurs in the absence of a particular phenomenon might not occur when

   In this conversation, Cause = Bad disks, and Effect = Back Pain. So this reads like this: Back pain that occurs in the absence of bad disks might not occur when there are bad disks. That doesn't match the evidence. We had bad disks with an absence of back pain. And the Anti-Conclusion we're trying to argue is that an effect (back pain) might occur for other people. This answer's Anti-Conclusion is that back pain might not occur.

   4%
4. D

   Not an Objection6% picked this

   A characteristic found in half of a given sample of the population might not occur in half

   What was the characteristic found in half of the sample? They had bulging / slipped disks. Was the author assuming or leaning on the idea that half of the entire population has bulging / slipped disks? No, she didn't care what % of the population has bad disks. She's concluding that bad disks don't cause back pain, regardless of the percentage of the population that has bad disks.

   6%
5. E

   Bad Conclusion Match11% picked this

   A factor that does not bring about a certain effect may nonetheless be more likely to be present when the effect occurs than

   The first part matches the evidence: we had a factor (bad disks) that did not bring about a certain effect (back pain). But this answer is saying that "bad disks may still be more likely present than not when back pain occurs". The issue of the conclusion is not whether bad disks are associated with back pain, but whether they cause back pain. Saying that "bulging / slipped disks are more likely to be found in someone with back pain" does not establish that the bad disks caused the back pain.

   11%