Magazine article: Punishment for

Answer choices

1. A

   Wrong Flaw Opposite7% picked this

   depends on data that there is reason to suspect may

   This argument specifies that it's depending on data that is "a great deal of data points, carefully assembled, carefully analyzed, empirical (externally observable)". So, it's the opposite of the famous Sampling Flaw that this answer choice is describing.

   7%
2. B

   Wrong Flaw3% picked this

   mistakenly allows the key term “punishment” to shift

   This describes the famous Equivocation flaw, in which a certain term is used in two very different ways, but "punishment" was used consistently here. Two different ways would be like: "Man, that leg workout yesterday was tough! My thighs took some punishment" vs. "Man, that judge was tough! 6 months of community service for peeing in someone's mailbox is some punishment"

   3%
3. C

   Correct83% picked this

   mistakes being sufficient to justify punishment for being required to

   Why this is right

   If we're familiar with our Famous Flaws (and especially the #1 most common / most important one), then we'll instantly see this answer as we scan for the words Necessary vs. Sufficient. If we're trying to figure out this language on the fly, the word "if" in the first sentence introduces a sufficient condition. If punishment actually then, punishment deters people from for crimes is justified committing crimes All the author needs to know is that the punishment deters people and he thinks that is enough (that is sufficient) to show that it's justified. When he starts acting like, "if it's not deterring, then it's never justified" he was switched to treating deterrence as the only (a required) way to justify punishment. It would be the same as if I went from saying, "Law school admissions will be impressed if you have a letter of recommendation from a famous judge who knows you. But Emily doesn't know any famous judges. So Emily will never be able to impress a law school admissions board." Whoa-whoa-whoa ... who said you need a letter of rec from RBG (RIP) to impress? Maybe you're a Rhodes Scholar or have performed at the Kennedy Center. When we go from saying "if it's true, you're good to go" to saying "if it's not there, you're screwed" we've gone from acting like something is Sufficient to acting like it's Necessary.

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

   83%
4. D

   Not an Objection: punishing the innocent1% picked this

   ignores the problem of mistakenly punishing

   Since the author is concluding that punishment is never justified, his position wouldn't conflict at all with someone saying, "But what about the problem of mistakenly punishing the innocent?" He'd be like, "I'm with ya. We shouldn't punish anyone. It's never justified."

   1%
5. E

   Opposite7% picked this

   attempts to be more precise than its subject matter

   We would complain that this conclusion is broader than its evidence properly allows. The author has potentially proven that "Punishment cannot be justified on the basis of deterrence alone". But it's too broad for her to say that "Punishment can never be justified".

   7%