30 LR Two Question 6
- « 30 LR Two Question 5
- 99 of 3815
- 30 LR Two Question 7 »
Comments
Haha! No! I figured it out! So I no longer needed clarification.
Thought this was false choice, can you explain the difference between false choice and suf. / nec confusion. thanks.
Yeah; the False Choice frame is totally a valid way to view this argument. That's really the point of what we're doing—trying to give you multiple ways to frame the flaws in these poorly-reasoned arguments.
There's lots of overlap! False Choice can look like SvN, as can the Causal Error. You can have an argument that contains an Ascriptive and Absence of Evidence flaw, and so on and so on.
The good news is that learning these types simply gives you a means of quickly identifying errors; inasmuch as those errors may coincide with other errors, the outcome is nevertheless the same. That is, your process may differ slightly from mine, but we'll both end up with the same result.
Here, for example, whether you call this an instance of a False Choice or of Conditional Conflation, either way you're seeing that the argument has confused one way of solving a problem with the only way of solving that problem.
Make sense?
if were supposed to be recognizing patterns and not analyzing how would you not want to choose E? I understand why B is the right answer, but I feel like I would have definitely picked E on the test.
The biggest problem with (E) is that the argument has not assumed it; it's offered into evidence.
What did you find attractive about (E)? Was it a case of overlooking the fact that it's in the argument?
I did select the correct answer but when I read E, I immediately thought of false choice flaw and of course the stimulus did not present any other choices, but if E would have said there is no other way instead of "there is no way" could this had been correct? This was my reason for not choosing E because it was just too strong, but at first glance I thought this was the flaw. Then B just sounded right.
For clarification on one of your responses to somebody here: You state the biggest problem with E is that the argument has not assumed it, it's offered into evidence. In other words are we to take at face value what the commissioner declared that there is NO other way to increase funds, hence this would not be a false choice flaw? You also commented on there being a lot of overlap, just trying to get my mind around this. I seem to now being narrowing my answer choices down to two, but that of course won't matter on test day!
Thanks again for the amazing explanations. You really make me think outside of the box, or maybe I overthink things..my flaw, ha!
Also I just want to comment that according to your study plan we are to get through 1-2 sections daily. I strive to complete 2, however I find with all the writing down and analyzing it has not been possible to get through 2, and sometimes half of a section. I know you state quality over quantity, but I'm just concerned I may need to cover more ground. Any suggestions would be helpful.
Have a great day!!!
Imagine this argument: There are ten people in this room, and they're all married. Thus, there's no suitable dating partner in this room. Here, the argument has assumed something (namely, that married people aren't suitable dating partners). But it has not assumed that there's no one else in the room; it said in evidence that there's not.
Same basic thing is happening in Q 6: The passage told us in evidence that there's no feasible way to increase funds. It thus has not assumed that there's no way to increase funds.
Clearer?
As to the homework, do the best you can. It's all you (or anyone) can ever be expected to do.
If you keep working to understand the material deeply, you'll be working in the most efficient way, and the way most likely to earn you good results. Don't worry about anything other than doing as much focused, pattern-intelligent practice as you are able. Remember that being able to teach someone else how to do a problem is a good measure of how well you understand the problem. That can therefore be a useful barometer for you.
Got it!!! Thanks again for taking the time to reach out and explain this.
I feel like I'm back in the groove again! I have been really taking the time to digest your materials and write out each time how I can attack each question once I define it UNTIL I GET IT, and this has been working great this morning. In other words, I printed out an empty LR chart (for analysis questions) you created to fill in. This is really helping a lot. The light is starting to turn on!
Thanks again!!!!