Self-study
Some statisticians claim that the surest way to increase the overall correctness of the total set of one's beliefs is: never change that set, except by rejecting a belief when given adequate evidence against it. ████████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ████ ████ ███ █████████ ████ ████████ ███ ████ █████████ ████ ███ ████ ██ █████████ ███ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ██████ ████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ████ █████ █████ ███████ ██████████ ███ █████ ████ █████ ███ █████ ████ ████ █████ ███ █████ ████████ █████ ██ ████ ████ ███████ ██ █████ ██ ████████ ███ ██████████████ █████ ████ ██ █████████
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that it is not correct to believe that the surest way to increase the overall correctness of a set of one’s beliefs is to never change the set, except by rejecting a belief when given adequate evidence against it. This is based on the author’s assertion that, if one were to follow that approach, then over time, one would have fewer and fewer beliefs. But, we need many beliefs in order to survive. (The implication is that following the approach described would threaten our ability to survive.)
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author’s premises establish that following the approach described threatens our ability to survive. But that doesn’t show that the approach isn’t the surest way to increase the overall correctness of one’s set of beliefs. Why can’t the surest way to increase overall correctness also threaten our survival?
23.
The argument is most vulnerable ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██
a
presumes, without providing ███ ██████████████ ████ ███ ██████ ███ ██ ██████████ ███ ███████ ███████████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ██ █████ ███████ ████ ███ ██████ █████ ███████ ██ ███████
The author assumes that the fact the approach described hurts our ability to survive shows that it’s not the surest way to increase overall correctness. (A) captures the author’s assumed connection between hurting survival and the surest way to increase overall correctness.
b
neglects the possibility ████ ████ █████ █████████ ███ ██████████████ █████ ███ █████ ████ ██████ ███ ███████ ████ █████████ ████ ████ █████ ██ ████████
The statisticians’ rule does not allow for accepting new beliefs. So the author doesn’t overlook this possibility.
c
overlooks the possibility ████ ████ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ███████ ███████ ████ ███ ████ █████ ████ ██ ███████
The author never takes a position on whether larger sets of beliefs are more or less correct than smaller sets. The possibility in (C), if true, would not undermine the author’s reasoning.
d
takes for granted ████ ███ ██████ ██████ ████ ███████ ███████ ██ ████████ ████ ████ █████ ████████ ████████ ███████ ████
The author never takes a position on what one “should” do. The argument is simply about whether a particular approach is the surest way to increasing overall correctness of beliefs. What one should believe or not believe doesn’t affect the reasoning.
e
takes for granted ████ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ████ ███████ ████ ███ ██ ███████ ███████
The argument concerns the overall correctness of a set of beliefs and the need for many beliefs to survive. Perhaps some beliefs can be false within a set of many beliefs; this doesn’t undermine the reasoning.