Subscription pricing
Game show host: Conclusion Humans are no better than apes at investing, that is, they do not attain a better return on their investments than apes do. ██ ████ ████ █████ ████████ ███ ███ ██████████ ██████ ████ ██ ███████ █████ ███ ██████ ███ █████ ████ ██████ █████████ ███ ███ █████ ██ █████ ███ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ ████ ██ ██████ █████████ ██ ████ █████
Summarize Argument
The game show host concludes that humans are no better than apes at investing. She supports this with an experiment in which five stock analysts and one chimpanzee were each given $1,350 to invest. After one month, the chimpanzee increased its net worth by $210, while the top analyst increased by only $140.
Identify and Describe Flaw
There are many flaws with the game show host’s argument and experiment. First is the cookie-cutter flaw of hasty generalization. She makes a generalization about all people based on a study of five, and about all apes based on a study of one chimpanzee. She also draws a conclusion about investing in general based on one small experiment that involved only short-term investing; she never considers the analysts’ and chimpanzee’s potential long-term results.
20.
Each of the following describes █ ████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ██████ █████████ ███████
a
A conclusion is █████ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ██ ██████████ █████████ ███ ███████████
b
No evidence is ███████ ████ ███████████ ███ ███████ ██ █████████████ █████ ███████ ███ ██████ ████████ ██████████ ██████████
c
A broad conclusion ██ █████ █████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ ██████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ████ ██ █████ █████ ████ ███████
d
Too general a ██████████ ██ ████ █████ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ █ ██████ ██████████ █████████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ███ █████████ ██████████
e
No evidence is ██████████ █████ ███ █████████ ███████████ ██ ███ ████████████ █████████ ██████ ████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████████