Brain scans of people exposed

Answer choices

1. A

   Not Necessary2% picked this

   It fails to establish that other methods that can be used to diagnose Parkinson’s disease are less

   Whenever a Flaw answer starts takes for granted / presumes / fails to establish, we can ask ourselves whether the idea that follows is a Necessary Assumption. Did this argument need to assume that "Other methods used to diagnose Parkinson's are less accurate than brain scans"? Nope. She's never arguing that brain scans are the best way to diagnose Parkinson's. She's only arguing that brain scans are a way to diagnose it its likelihood of developing.

   2%
2. B

   Out of Scope: importance0% picked this

   It overestimates the importance of early diagnosis in determining appropriate treatments for people suffering

   The author is only claiming that brain scans can provide an early diagnosis. She's never saying that this is important or that people should try to get an early diagnosis. So we can't say she overestimated the importance of early diagnosis because she never comments on the importance of doing so at all.

   0%
3. C

   Correct94% picked this

   It mistakes a correlation between the type of brain damage described and Parkinson’s disease for a causal

   Why this is right

   When a flaw answer says the author confuses X with Y mistakes X for Y we just want to check whether X sounds like the evidence and Y sounds like something the author concluded. Was there a correlation between the type of brain damaged described and Parkinson's disease? Yes, the author tells us that the type of brain damage we saw in these brain scans is the same as what we find in people suffering from Parkinson's. Did the author proceed to assume a causal relationship between the two? Yes, she said "This shows that the brain damage itself causes Parkinson's disease". That is definitely an illegal move. We're not allowed to think that just because two things are correlated that one of them definitely causes the other. That's one of the 10 famous flaws.

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

   94%
4. D

   Not Necessary1% picked this

   It assumes that people would want to know as early as possible whether they were likely

   Whenever a Flaw answer starts takes for granted / assumes / fails to establish, we can ask ourselves whether the idea that follows is a Necessary Assumption. Did this argument need to assume that "People want to know as early as possible whether they're likely to develop Parkinson's?" No, she isn't saying that people will want to use brain scans to determine whether they're likely to develop Parkinson's. Her conclusion is only claiming that brain scans could be used for that purpose. And there's nothing in the paragraph that has anything do with the extreme language of "as early as possible".

   1%
5. E

   Not Necessary3% picked this

   It neglects to specify how the information provided by brain scans could be used either in treating Parkinson’s disease or in monitoring

   Whenever a Flaw answer starts takes for granted / presumes / fails to establish / neglects to specify, we can ask ourselves whether the idea that follows is a Necessary Assumption. Did this argument need to assume that "the brain scan information could be used to treat or monitor the progression of Parkinson's?" Nope. She's only claiming that the brain scans can allow us to see who is likely to one day develop Parkinson's disease.

   3%