Rolanda: The house on Oak Avenue

Answer choices

1. A

   Not an Objection1% picked this

   He fails to take into account the possibility that there are advantages to having

   Our problem with what he did was that he complained about Rolanda's favorite house by mentioning something that was true of all the other houses being considered. He hasn't clarified that he prefers big yard over small yard. And even if you prefer a big yard you may still recognize that a small yard has some advantages (doesn't take as much work to maintain). So we can't say he failed to take into account possible advantages of a small yard.

   1%
2. B

   Opposite3% picked this

   He presumes, without providing justification, that property that belongs to the city is available

   He's actually insinuating that, in Prairieview, you don't really have as much yard as it looks like, because the city owns the first 20 feet. He isn't clearly implying what the limits on city property are / aren't, but since he brings this up as a negative, we're more inclined to think he presumes that city property is less available for private use in at least some way.

   3%
3. C

   Generalization is Applicable9% picked this

   He improperly applies a generalization to an instance that it was not

   The generalization he makes is about property lines in Prairieview. That property line rule is intended to cover the house on Oak Ave, so he didn't do anything wrong by thinking that this rule was relevant to that property. He ignores that a generalization he applied to reject one choice would equally apply to all the other choices, because the generalization is intended to cover all those instances (i.e. houses in Prairieview).

   9%
4. D

   Correct80% picked this

   He fails to apply a general rule to all

   Why this is right

   Gross. Are you serious? That's a gross correct answer. It works as a description of his flaw in the sense that he's stupidly failing to see that the negative thing he's bringing up against the Oak Ave house would apply equally to all the other houses in Prairieview that he and Rolanda have seen. By failing to consider that the "20ft of city property" ordinance would also apply to the other houses they saw, he's is .... ugh .... failing to apply this ordinance to all relevant instances.

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

   80%
5. E

   Wrong Flaw8% picked this

   He presumes, without providing justification, that whatever is true of a part of a thing is also

   This describes the Famous Flaw of Part vs. Whole, in which a trait that is true of a Part/Whole is assumed to also be true of a Whole/Part. He doesn't recycle a trait when he goes from premise to conclusion, nor does he go from talking about a part in the evidence to talking about group in the conclusion. He says, "That yard ain't as big as it looks, b/c first 20ft are city property" and therefore, "That house ain't the best". Part vs. Whole would sound more like "Because that house, which is part of Prairieview, isn't the best house for us, we can conclude that Prairieview as a town isn't the best town for us."

   8%