Joshua Smith’s new novel was

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Description16% picked this

   It relies on the assumption that a criticism can legitimately be dismissed as unwarranted if it is offered by someone who

   The author dismisses the criticism by appealing to the content of the novel, not by saying the critic has previously displayed bad judgment. The mention of "criticisms from the same source in the past" is offered as further context for the author's dismissal — but the actual argument given is about each incident being plausible, not about the critic's judgment history. The author does not rely on past judgment as the reason.

   16%
2. B

   Bad Description9% picked this

   It ignores the fact that people can agree about something even though what they agree about

   The author appeals to what readers would agree about — but the issue here is not whether agreement equals truth. The flaw is in moving from individual-incident plausibility to whole-novel plausibility. Whether people can agree on something false is not the operative problem.

   9%
3. C

   Ad Hominem2% picked this

   It calls into question the intellectual integrity of the critic in order to avoid having to address the grounds on

   The author does not attack the critic personally instead of addressing the criticism. The author does address the criticism on its merits — by arguing each incident is plausible. The flaw is in how the author addresses it (the part-to-whole leap), not in dodging it through personal attack.

   2%
4. D

   Correct62% picked this

   It takes for granted that a whole story will have a given characteristic if each of its

   Why this is right

   This nails the flaw. The author concludes the whole novel has a property (plausibility) by establishing that each part (each individual incident) has that property. But plausibility does not transfer that way — a bunch of individually plausible events can combine into an implausible whole if their combination is too unlikely. The argument assumes a property of parts must be a property of the whole.

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

   62%
5. E

   Circular Reasoning11% picked this

   It attempts to justify its conclusion by citing reasons that most people would find plausible only if they were already convinced

   This describes circular reasoning — citing reasons that only work if you already accept the conclusion. The author here does not do that; the appeal to "anyone who has actually read the novel would agree" can be evaluated independently of believing the conclusion. The flaw is structural (parts-to-whole), not circular.

   11%