PT150 S2 Q1 ExplanationPhilosopher: I have been told

Answer choices, explained

1. A

   Not Equivocation1% picked this

   uses the term "interest" in two different ways when the argument requires that it be

   This answer refers to another one of the 10 Famous Flaws, Equivocation, in which the argument uses the same term/concept multiple times but in completely different ways. For example, the word "interest" could mean how much curiosity someone feels, or it could mean the amount of money that an investment earns. But this argument is consistently using "interest" to mean the amount of enthusiasm / curiosity that someone has for a subject.

   1%
2. B

   Correct96% picked this

   treats a group as representative of a larger group when there is reason to believe

   Why this is right

   This describes the Famous Flaw, Sampling. The evidence is about "students who attend philosophical talks". They have interest in philosophical issues. On this basis, the author concludes that a broader group, "most university students" share the same trait. So the first half of the answer is definitely descriptively accurate: the author is treating the group of students attending the talks as though they are representative of the larger group of most university students. Is there reason to believe that the group of students attending philosophy talks is unrepresentative of university students in general? Yes! It's a self-selecting sample. You're only at a philosophy talk if you've been forced to come or chose to come because you're interested. It would be like trying to figure out what percentage of a given city is religious by checking what percentage of the people at a church are religious. That's a self-selecting sample.

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

   96%
3. C

   Bad Conclusion/Evidence Match0% picked this

   appeals to the popularity of an academic field as evidence of the worth of

   Since this says that the author appeals to X as evidence of Y, we know that X should match the evidence and Y should match the conclusion. Is the conclusion talking about the "worth" of the field of philosophy? Nope. It's just saying that "Most college students have an interest in the field". That doesn't claim in any way that the field is worthwhile. That's enough reason to ditch this answer. Is the evidence talking about how popular philosophy is? Not really. It's talking about the interest level of students who attend talks, which we could painfully stretch to be a claim about "how popular the field of philosophy is", but that's is way too big a stretch.

   0%
4. D

   Bad Conclusion/Evidence Match1% picked this

   takes for granted that just because there is no evidence that interest in something is decreasing,

   Since this says that the author assumes that because of X, it must be Y, we know that X should match the evidence and Y should match the conclusion. Is the conclusion saying that "interest in philosophy is increasing"? Nope. It's just saying that "Most college students have an interest in the field". That doesn't claim in any way that interest in the field is increasing, or changing at all. That's enough reason to ditch this answer. Is the evidence saying "there's no evidence that interest in philosophy is decreasing"? Nope. It's talking about the interest level of students who attend talks. It's not saying anything about interest not-decreasing. So this would also be enough of a reason to ditch this answer.

   1%
5. E

   Bad Conclusion/Evidence Match1% picked this

   takes for granted that it is good that university students have an interest in a certain subject just because the person making

   Since this says that the author assumes that it is Y just because of X, we know that X should match the evidence and Y should match the conclusion. Is the conclusion saying that "it is good that university students have an interest in philosophy"? Nope. It's just saying that "Most college students have an interest in the field". That doesn't claim in any way whether it's good or bad. That's enough reason to ditch this answer. The evidence part of this also doesn't match. The argument's evidence was about the interest level of students who attend the author's philosophy talks. This answer claims the evidence said that "someone's self-interest is being served by an argument", which doesn't bear any resemblance to the premise.

   1%