Astronomer: Proponents of the hypothesis

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct84% picked this

   concludes, simply because there is no evidence in favor of a hypothesis, that there is

   Why this is right

   Does the author conclude that there is evidence against a hypothesis? Yes, her conclusion is "there is good reason to regard the hypothesis as false". Is the author's evidence simply that there is no evidence in favor of the hypothesis? Yes, basically. We might worry that saying "they merely offer arguments against the view that life evolved on Earth" also counts as a premise (so the "simply" would be too extreme, because it means that the only premise is the final claim after the semicolon). But ultimately we'll resign ourselves to this being the best answer, since you can kind of treat those last two claims after the "for" as one big idea: "they haven't produced any evidence in favor of their hypothesis, only arguments against a competing hypothesis". This answer best captures our objection that "Just because there's no positive support for the ET-spore theory doesn't mean, as your conclusion says, that there is good reason against the hypothesis."

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

   84%
2. B

   Out of Scope: inherently implausible6% picked this

   fails to justify its claim that the view being criticized is

   The author never claims that this theory is "inherently implausible". The author says there is good reason to think it's false, but that doesn't mean that the internal logic of the hypothesis makes no sense (i.e. "inherently implausible").

   6%
3. C

   Bad Conclusion/Premise Match5% picked this

   reasons that a hypothesis is false simply because there is another hypothesis that is equally

   Does the author conclude that a hypothesis is false? No, she just concludes that there's good reason to think it's false, which is not as strong. Is the author's evidence that another hypothesis is equally likely to be true? No, the author's evidence is that proponents haven't produced any positive support in favor of their hypothesis.

   5%
4. D

   Wrong Flaw2% picked this

   attempts to derive a conclusion from premises that

   This refers to the famous Internal Contradiction flaw, but there's no contradiction between the conclusion (good reason to think X is false) and the evidence (no one has any support for X being true).

   2%
5. E

   Not a Flaw3% picked this

   grants the truth of claims that are made by the advocates of the hypothesis but that do nothing to

   Our author maybe grants the truth of the 3.8 and 3.5 billion year facts, because those are prefaced by "proponents point out that", which seems to convey the author's tacit acceptance. Meanwhile, the claim that complex life couldn't have evolved in 0.3 billion is appended by "they claim", indicating the author might not accept that. But there's no reason to complain that someone granted the truth of some of the claims made by their opponents. That's called making some concessions. It's not a flaw; it's actually responsible, credible debating.

   3%