Politician: Every regulation currently

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope: increase1% picked this

   takes for granted that the trade deficit will increase in size if no action is

   The author has never said or implied anything about the deficit increasing.

   1%
2. B

   Too Strong12% picked this

   takes for granted that the only means of strengthening the economy is reducing

   Too Strong: the only Only Thing Mentioned ? Only Thing The author hasn't said or implied anything that sounds as extreme and restrictive as "this is the only way to reduce the deficit". Just because proposed regulations are the only deficit reducer mentioned doesn't mean anyone is thinking that they're are the only deficit reducer.

   12%
3. C

   Wrong Flaw3% picked this

   merely appeals to the authority of the committee without evaluating any reasons for

   This describes the famous Inappropriate Appeal to Authority. But the author mentions the committee; she doesn't appeal to their authority. She's appealing to the fact that the regulations proposed by the committee would reduce the deficit to argue that the regulations proposed by the committee would help the economy.

   3%
4. D

   Correct55% picked this

   fails to consider the possibility that one effect of a regulation will be offset

   Why this is right

   This is what our first objection was about. There's a shift from Part to Whole in this argument, by saying that because the regulations will help part of our economic health positively (the trade deficit part), it'll help our overall economic health positively. But it's possible that the regulations do some helpful things and some unhelpful things, and this answer is raising the valid objection that the negatives may offset, or even outweigh, the positives.

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

   55%
5. E

   Wrong Flaw30% picked this

   concludes that every regulation in a set will have the same effects as a set of

   This describes the famous Part vs. Whole flaw. It's very tempting to think this argument is headed that direction, when we see a conclusion that says "Each of the regulations". But we can try to match this answer choice up with the argument and it won't work. Does the author conclude that every regulation in a set has an effect? Yes. She concludes that every regulation will have the effect of "helping the economy". Is the author's evidence a claim that "the set of regulations as a whole will help the economy? No. The evidence is that "Each regulation" will lower the trade deficit.

   30%