Self-paced
Ornithologist: Support The curvature of the claws of modern tree-dwelling birds enables them to perch in trees. ███ █████ ██ █████████████ ███ ████████ █████ ████████ █████████ ████ ███████ █████████ ████ ████ ████ ███████ ███ ████████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ██████████ ████████████ ███ ████████ █ █████████████ █████████
███████████████ ███ ███ ███████ ██ █████ ██ █████ ██ ███ ████ ████████ ████ ████████████ ███ █ █████████████ █████ ████████ ████ █████ ████ ███████ ██ ██████ ███ ████████ ███ █████████ ████████████████
Ornithologist's Argument
The ornithologist concludes that Archeopteryx probably lived in trees. This is supported by an analogy to modern tree-dwelling birds, whose curved claws let them perch in trees. Archeopteryx also had curved claws, so according to the ornithologist, Archeopteryx must also have been able to perch in trees.
However, there's an important gap in this argument. The ornithologist's evidence shows that Archeopteryx probably could live in trees, but the conclusion is that Archeopteryx probably did live in trees. To get there, the ornithologist has to assume that Archeopteryx’s ability to perch in trees indicates Archeopteryx having actually spent time in trees.
Paleontologist's Argument
In response, the paleontologist concludes that being able to perch in trees doesn't actually support Archeopteryx being tree-dwelling. To back up this claim, the paleontologist introduces a competing analogy. The paleontologist compares Archeopteryx to chickens, which are able to perch in trees, and yet live mostly on the ground.
8.
In responding to the ornithologist's ██████████ ████ ████████████ ███ ██████████████ ███ ██████████████
a
questions the qualifications ██ ███ █████████████ ██ ████████ ███ ████████
The paleontologist doesn't question the ornithologist's qualifications or otherwise attack the ornithologist personally. The paleontologist just thinks the ornithologist's conclusion is based on insufficient evidence.
b
denies the truth ██ ███ ██████ ███ █████████████ █████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████
The paleontologist never denies that Archeopteryx actually had curved claws, or that curved claws allow birds to perch in trees. Instead, the paleontologist accepts these premises but adds new evidence to undermine the ornithologist's argument.
c
uses a parallel ████ ██ ██████████ █ ████████ ██ ███ ███████████████ ████████
The paleontologist relies on an analogy—in other words, a parallel—between Archeopteryx and chickens. This parallel shows that birds with curved claws don't necessarily live in trees, undermining the ornithologist's argument.
d
shows that the ██████████ ███████████ ███ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ████ ██ ███████ ██
The paleontologist doesn't try to establish an internal contradiction in the ornithologist's argument. Besides which, the ornithologist's argument doesn't contradict itself.
e
provides additional evidence ██ ███████ ███ ███████████████ ████████
Although the paleontologist provides additional evidence, it's not meant to support the ornithologist's argument. The paleontologist attempts to undermine the ornithologist's argument.