PT141 S2 Q5 ExplanationScience writer: Lemaitre argued

Answer choices, explained

1. A

   Out of Scope2% picked this

   The conclusion is derived partly from assertions attributed to a purported expert whose credibility

   Out of Scope: appeal to an expert One of the ten famous flaws is Inappropriate Appeal (to Emotion or a to dubious expert). This is not committing that flaw since none of the evidence provides an assertion attributed to a purported expert. The only attributed assertion is Lemaitre's theory, but that's not part of the author's evidence; that's what the author is trying to refute.

   2%
2. B

   Not Equivocation2% picked this

   The conclusion is based on a shift in meaning of a key term from one part of the

   This answer refers to another one of the ten famous flaws, Equivocation, which is almost never the correct answer. There was no term being used two different times in two different ways.

   2%
3. C

   Not Causal6% picked this

   The science writer takes for granted the existence of a causal connection

   This is presenting language that sounds like another of the ten famous flaws, Causal Overconfidence, in which an author presents a funky fact (like a correlation) and then overconfidently concludes one possible explanation for the fact, while failing to consider other possible explanations. This argument has nothing to do with presenting a correlation and then concluding that one thing caused the other. This argument is saying, "Since Theory X makes the same observed prediction as Theory Y, Theory Y must be inadequate".

   6%
4. D

   Correct85% picked this

   The science writer fails to see that one theory's correctly predicting observed data cannot itself constitute evidence against an alternative

   Why this is right

   This is saying the author fails to understand that just because the oscillating universe theory (O.U.T.) correctly predicts that galaxies accelerate away from each other, that doesn't do anything to make Lemaitre's theory look bad. His theory also makes that prediction.

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

   85%
5. E

   Too Strong: only6% picked this

   The science writer presumes, without providing justification, that there are only two possible explanations for

   The argument only presented two explanations for why galaxies are accelerating away from one another, but that doesn't mean the author is assuming that these are the only two possible explanations. There are a bajillion trap answers that take this form. They try to make people think that "the only thing mentioned having trait X is therefore the only thing that has trait X". This is the same mistake "All Lives Matter" people make when they hear "Black Lives Matter" and think this claim is somehow saying that "Black lives are the only type of life that matters".

   6%