Self-study
Scientist: To study the comparative effectiveness of two experimental medications for athlete’s foot, a representative sample of people with athlete’s foot were randomly assigned to one of two groups. ███ █████ ████████ ████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███ █████ ████████ ████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ ██████ █████ ███████████ ████ ███ █████ ███ ████ █████ ██████████ ██
█████████ ████ ██████ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ███████████ ████ ████ ███ ███ ██████ ████ ██████ ███ ███ ███████ ██████████ ██
Summarize Argument
The reporter concludes that, in a study testing medications for athlete’s foot, anyone who was not cured was not given medication M. This is based on the observation that, in the study, everyone whose athlete’s foot was cured received medication M.
Identify and Describe Flaw
This is a cookie-cutter flaw: confusing sufficient and necessary conditions. In the study, everyone whose athlete’s foot was cured received medication M, making medication M necessary to have been cured in this study. However, that doesn’t mean medication M is sufficient to cure every case that it was used to treat. In other words, it’s possible that not everyone who received medication M was cured.
11.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████████████ █████ ██ ██████████
a
The reporter concludes ████ ████████ ███████ ████ ████ █ ███ ████ ███████████ ████ ████ █ ██████ █████ ███████████ █████
The argument confuses sufficient and necessary conditions. Only M cures athlete’s foot, making it necessary for curing athlete’s foot in the study. However, that doesn’t mean it’s sufficient to always cure athlete’s foot.
b
The reporter illicitly █████ █ ██████████ █████ ███ ██████████ ██ █ █████ ██ ███ █████ ██ █ █████ █████████ ████ ██ █ ██████ ██ ███ ███████████
The reporter only draws a conclusion about the study, not the population as a whole.
c
The reporter presumes, ███████ █████████ ██████████████ ████ ███████████ █ ███ █ ███ █████████ ██ ██████ ███ ████ ███████████ ████ ███ ███ ███ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████
The reporter doesn’t make any claims about the availability of the medications, only their effects on athlete’s foot in the study.
d
The reporter fails ██ █████ ███ ███ ███████████ ████ ███████████ ████ ███ ██ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ███ ███████████ ███████ ██ ██████
The reporter is only drawing a conclusion about the efficacy of medication M based on the study, and doesn’t need to account for the possibility that athlete’s foot could be cured in other ways.
e
The reporter presumes, ███████ █████████ ██████████████ ████ █████ ██ ██ ████████ ████████ ██ ██████ █████ ███████████ ████ ████ ██ █████ ████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ████ ██████████ ██
The reporter is only discussing the study, where every participant whose athlete’s foot was cured had received M. The possibility of this kind of subgroup is irrelevant to M being necessary to cure athlete’s foot in the study.