Self-study
Columnist: Neuroscientists have found that Support states of profound creativity are accompanied by an increase of theta brain waves, which occur in many regions of the brain, including the hippocampus. ████ ████ █████ ████ █████████ ██ █████ █████████ █████ █████ █████████████ █████ ███ ███ ██████ █ █████ ██ ████████ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████████ ██ █ ████ ██ ████████ ██████
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author concludes that listening to music can trigger a state of profound creativity. This is because listening to music increases theta brainwaves. And increased theta brainwaves are found when someone is in a state of profound creativity.
Identify and Describe Flaw
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of assuming that correlation proves causation. The columnist observes that increased theta brainwaves are correlated with states of profound creativity. He then implicitly concludes that theta brainwaves cause a state of profound creativity. (And therefore music, by increasing theta brainwaves, can causally trigger that state.)
But this overlooks the possibility that it’s the other way around: maybe being in a state of creativity is what leads to higher theta brainwaves. Or maybe a third factor—say, waking up early in the morning—both triggers a state of profound creativity and increases theta brainwaves. If either of these were true, listening to music could increase theta brainwaves without triggering a state of profound creativity.
23.
The columnist's reasoning is most ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██
a
takes for granted ████ █████ ██ █ ██████ ██████████ ███████ ███ ███████████ ███ █████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████████ ██████████
The proposed causal connection is about theta brainwaves, not any particular part of the brain. The theta brainwaves occur in “many regions of the brain” aside from the hippocampus.
b
fails to consider ████ █████ ██ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ██ ██ ██ █ █████ ██ ████████ ██████████
The columnist doesn’t assume this, so it can’t be the flaw. The columnist is saying that music is sufficient (if you have it, you’ll get a profound creative state), not that it’s necessary (you can’t have the state without music).
c
does not rule ███ ███ ███████████ ████ █████████ ██ █████ ██ █████ █████ ████ █ ████ █████████ ████ █████████ █████ █████
Even if this were true, it wouldn’t be a flaw in the argument. It’s perfectly possible for the columnist to also believe that listening to music in different formats also increases theta waves.
d
ignores the possibility ████ ██ ████████ ██ █████ █████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ ███████████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████████ ██████████
(D) expresses the textbook causal reasoning flaw in an uncommon (but still legit!) way, essentially saying "the correlation between theta waves and creativity may not be perfect" or even "someone having theta waves may not be sufficient to conclude they are in creative state." This phrasing highlights the way in which correlative/causal reasoning and conditional reasoning can sometimes overlap.
As mentioned in the analysis, though, the top-of-mind reason the correlation could be imperfect is that theta waves may not cause creativity.
e
provides insufficient reasons ██ ███████ ████ ██████ ███ ███ ███ ██ ██████ ██ ████████ ██████████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ █████ █████
The columnist's conclusion only concerns people who are in states of profound creativity. Also, the columnist's language is relative—increased brainwaves accompany states of profound creativity. So the alternative could be moderate, rather than low, levels of brainwaves.