Scientists are sometimes said to assume

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Premise Match2% picked this

   A general statement is argued to be false by showing that it has deliberately been

   Does the conclusion argue that a general statement is false? Sure, the author says "this characterization of scientists (this general statement about scientists) is false." Does the evidence say that the people accusing scientists of believing this principle have deliberately tried to mislead? No, there's no language like that in the premises. The premises are just saying "if you follow the logic of this position, you'll see it's a crazy position (and scientists aren't crazy)."

   2%
2. B

   Correct63% picked this

   A statement is argued to be false by showing that taking it to be true

   Why this is right

   Does the conclusion argue that a statement is false? Sure, the author says "this characterization of scientists (this general statement about scientists) is false." Does the evidence say "if it were true that scientists believed this, we'd reach an implausible consequence"? Yes, the author's saying "by the characterization above" is equivalent to "if we took it to be true that scientists followed this principle". And the author ends up showing the implausible (i.e. absurd) consequence that a scientist would be forced to assume contradictory things.

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

   63%
3. C

   Bad Premise Match25% picked this

   A statement is shown to be false by showing that it directly contradicts a second statement that is

   Does the conclusion show that a statement is false? Sure, the author says "this characterization of scientists (this general statement about scientists) is false." Does the evidence say that it directly contradicts a second statement? No. The author engages in a thought experiment in which she applies the supposed principle that the scientists believe. As she role plays their thinking, according to this principle, it results in them having contradictory beliefs. What this answer describes is an argument in which you say, "People sometimes say X, but they are clearly wrong. After all, we know Y is true and Y = ~X."

   25%
4. D

   Weak Conclusion Match Bad Premise Match7% picked this

   A general statement is shown to be uninformative by showing that there are as many specific instances in which it is false as there

   The conclusion is saying that a general statement is "clearly wrong", not that it's "uninformative". And the premises have nothing to do with counting up and comparing the number of cases in which the principle is true and those in which the principle is false.

   7%
5. E

   Weak Conclusion Match Bad Premise Match3% picked this

   A statement is shown to be uninformative by showing that it supports no

   The conclusion is saying that a general statement is "clearly wrong", not that it's "uninformative". And the premises have nothing to do whether or not "this characterization of scientists supports any independently testable inferences".

   3%