Self-study
Benson: In order to maintain the quality of life in our city, we need to restrict growth. ████ ██ ███ █ ███████ ███ ███ ██████ ████████████
████████ █ ███ █████ ████ █████████ ███ █████ ████ ███ █████ ████ █████ ████ ████ ████ ███ ████ ███████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████ ███ ██ ████████ ███████ █████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ██ ████ ████ ██ ███████████ ███████ █ ██████ ███ ████████████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Willett concludes, contra Benson, that the new zoning regulations should be opposed. His reason for doing so is that he believes he was justified in opposing previous zoning regulations.
Identify and Describe Flaw
Willett’s reasoning is questionable because he can’t make a definitive conclusion about the present/future based only on the past. Even if the previously proposed regulations were unjustified, the new regulations might be worth supporting. The city could have changed in the several years since the previous regulations were proposed.
2.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ █ ███ ██ █████ █████████ █████████ ██ █████████████
a
It presumes that ██████ ██ ███████████ ████ ███████ ████████ ███████ ███ ████ █████████
We don’t know that Willett thinks that growth is necessarily good—we only know that he thinks growth is good for a specific city at some specific times.
b
It is based ██ █████████ ██████ ██████████ ██████ ████ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██████████
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of attacking the source of argument rather than its content (ad hominem); it isn’t relevant here, because Willett isn’t making a personal attack.
c
It ignores the ███████████ ████ ███ ███████ ███ ███████████ ██████ ████ ██████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ██████
If new reasons for restricting growth have arisen, it means that Willett’s reliance on old reasons to oppose the regulations is unsound. This is the problem of induction that Willett failed to account for.
d
It fails to ████ ████ ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ██ █ █████
This isn’t the problem with the argument, because the number of different factors contributing to city quality of life is irrelevant to Willett’s conclusion.
e
It overlooks the ███████████ ████ ███ ████ ███████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ███ ██████ █████████ ██ ██████ ██ ██████ ████████████
Even if the council of ten years ago was poorly qualified, their decision to oppose regulations could have been correct. And even if they were correct to oppose those regulations, that wouldn’t be enough to justify opposing the new regulations—which is the flaw in Willett’s reasoning.