A large survey of scientists

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct67% picked this

   The scientists surveyed are generally aware that the results of the Brown-Eisler Experiment together with Wang's Law

   Why this is right

   If we were to negate this, we'd be saying that "most of the scientists surveyed aren't aware that combining B-E with Wang's would contradict Minsk". That's a huge objection to the argument. If these scientists know 1 and know 2, but they don't know that 1 + 2 = 3, then we can't conclude that they know 3.

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

   67%
2. B

   Too Strong: exactly27% picked this

   The scientists in the survey who know the results of the Brown-Eisler Experiment are exactly the same ones

   The argument doesn't need there to be a 100% match between the two groups. The author just needs there to be enough scientists who end up in both groups (know B-E / accept Wang's) that it still adds up to more than 50% of the scientists surveyed. If we negate this, we're just saying "there is either at least one scientist who knows the B-E results but doesn't know Wang's or vice versa". Since we were told "almost all" of them accept Wang and know B-E, we're really saying something more like, "90% of them accept Wang's, and 91% of them know the B-E results". Even if those two groups don't perfectly overlap, there's still enough overlap for the author to think that more than 50% of the scientists are showing up in both of those groups.

   27%
3. C

   Out of Scope: how obtained2% picked this

   Almost all of the scientists surveyed are familiar with the way in which the results of the

   The argument only needs these scientists to know of and accept the results of the B-E experiment. She doesn't need the scientists to also know the backstory of how those results were obtained. If we negated this and said, "no, it's not almost all of them ... only about 65% of them are familiar with how the results were obtained", it wouldn't change anything about the argument.

   2%
4. D

   Out of Scope: representative2% picked this

   The sample is large enough to be representative of scientists in

   If the conclusion had said "Therefore, most scientists", then, yes, the argument would be assuming that the scientists surveyed were representative of scientists overall. But the conclusion is only talking about the scientists surveyed, so there is no sampling assumption being made, because there is no "extrapolation to a bigger group" happening in the conclusion.

   2%
5. E

   Out of Scope: reality vs. belief3% picked this

   Wang's Law has in fact been shown to

   This argument is only about what scientists believe / accept / reject. The argument isn't changed one way or the other by any of the underlying concepts being true or false in reality. This is purely about arguing, "Given these two separate beliefs these scientists hold, and given the connection between these beliefs implies a third belief, these scientists must hold that third belief."

   3%