Self-study
Politician: A major social problem is children hurting other children. ███ ███████ ██ █ ██████ ██████████ ██ █████████████ █████████ ████ ████████ ███████ █████ ██ ██ █████ ██████ ███████████ ███ ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ █████████████ █████████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████ ███ █████ ██ ████████ ███████ █ ████ ██ ██████ ████████ ████ ███ █████ ██████ █ ██████ █████ ██ ████████ ███ ███ █████ ███ █████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██████ ████████ ██ █ ████ ██████████ █ ████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ███ ███ ████ ███ ████ ███████ ███ ████ █████ █████ ████ ██ ███ █████ ████████ ███ ████
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The politician hypothesizes that watching violent films contributes to the problem of children hurting other children. He supports this by citing a study where most children who saw a film of people punching a Bobo the Clown doll later punched the doll themselves, while those who didn't watch the film didn't punch it.
Notable Assumptions
The politician assumes that punching the Bobo doll is an accurate indicator of a child's tendency to hurt other children.
He also assumes that the study is representative and that its findings can be generalized to all children.
He also assumes that watching the film is the primary or sole cause of the children's behavior, ignoring other potential factors that could contribute to their behavior.
17.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ ████ ███████ ███ ████████████ █████████
a
Some of the ████████ ███ ███ ███ █████ ███ ████ █████ █████████ ████ ███ ███ ████ █████ ███ █████ █████████ █████ ███ ███ █████ ███ █████
Whether some of the children in each group chastised children who punched the doll doesn’t weaken the politician’s argument, which relies on the observation that most of the children who watched the film did punch the doll.
Illusory inconsistency
Illusory inconsistency
Answer is attractive because it seems to (but doesn't actually) contradict the premises or conclusion.
b
The child who ███████ ███ ████ ████ ███ ███████ ███ ███ ████ ██████████ ███ ███ ████ █████ ███ █████
Even if a child who didn't watch the film punched the doll the hardest, the fact remains that most children who watched the film did punch the doll, while most who didn't watch it did not. So (B) doesn’t weaken the politician's argument.
Illusory inconsistency
Illusory inconsistency
Answer is attractive because it seems to (but doesn't actually) contradict the premises or conclusion.
c
The children who ███ ████ █████ ███ ████ ████ █████ ██ ██ ██ ████ ██████ ████ ███ ████████ ███ ███ ███ ████ █████ ███ ████ ██ █████ █████ █████████
The politician aims to address children hurting other children. For his conclusion to hold, he must assume that children who punch the doll will also hurt other children. But if children who watch the film are no more likely to punch other children, his argument falls apart.
d
Some children who ███ ███ ████ █████ ███ ████ ████████ ███ ████████ ██ █████ ███ ███ ████ █████ ███ ████ ███ ███ ███████ ███ █████
Like (B), it doesn’t matter that some of the children who didn’t watch the film later punched the doll, because the politician’s argument relies on the fact that most children who watched the film did punch the doll, while most who didn't watch it did not.
Illusory inconsistency
Illusory inconsistency
Answer is attractive because it seems to (but doesn't actually) contradict the premises or conclusion.
e
Many of the ████████ ███ ████████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ███ █████ ████ █ ████ ████ ██████ ███ ███████████
Whether the children had seen a Bobo doll before doesn’t change how the groups reacted to the doll after watching the film or not watching film.