B isn't correct because there isn't a sufficient-necessary relationship in the stimulus. Rather the flaw in the argument is in the premise ("After all, the argument Arnot makes for this claim depends on the dubious assumption that government can be trusted to act in the interest of the public").
Remember that the flaw will always be in the support - and that support relationship is focused on the last two sentences, the first sentence is giving context as it is the opposing viewpoint.
If you still have a hard time with eliminating B, can you share what you find to be the sufficient-necessary relationship?
If you're thinking that this is the sufficient necessary relationship: fundamental change -> eliminating social ills
Then I would suggest redirecting your focus on the support instead, which is saying that there is a dubious assumption that the government can be trusted to act in the interest of the public. Where does it fit into in the sufficient-necessary relationship?
the key term AC's are so strange they show up very often in my drills and are almost never the correct answer which has since made me curious what it would look like when it is the correct answer.
I still don't see why D is incorrect. Is it because the subscriber distorts a premise instead? He states that the claim (conclusion) depends upon a premise Arnot did not state (assumption that the government can be trusted to act in public interest). Any clarification would be great
@AlexanderFry I interpret distorting someone's argument as a situation in which other person said "X" but you claim the person said "Y." In other words, you're claiming they said something they didn't.
But claiming that someone made an assumption isn't a distortion of the other person's argument, even if it's wrong to say that the person made a certain assumption. (In this case it's also not clear that it's wrong to say the other person's argument made the assumption the author claims it makes. But even if it were, it's not a distortion.)
This is because you're still accurately portraying what they said. You may be wrong about the idea that what they said requires some other belief, but you're not changing what they said.
I was rlly confused on why D was incorrect, so I asked Chat, IK I'm not supposed to... but it helped. Sometimes I just need to see an example of the wrong AC to understand why it does not work with question. Hope this helps someone!
ARGUMENT:
Arnot argues that making fundamental changes in government would virtually eliminate major social ills.But this conclusion is false. After all, Arnot’s argument depends on the dubious assumption that government can be trusted to act in the public interest.
What the argument would look like IF D (straw man) were correct
Arnot claims that if we give the government sweeping new powers, all social problems will immediately disappear and government officials will always act perfectly. This is obviously false, since governments are often corrupt and inefficient. Therefore, Arnot’s conclusion must be wrong.
Why THIS is straw man
Arnot is made to say something stronger and different than what he actually argued
“All social problems will immediately disappear”
“Government will always act perfectly”
Those exaggerations do not appear in Arnot’s real argument.
The speaker attacks that exaggerated version instead.
So to clarify is this a basic AOE flaw? the idea that you didn't prove your POV therefore mine is clearly correct? Also again (whenever I dont know the meaning of the word its ALWAYS the answer) not joking may be a legit test day thing if POE permits
I see some, "i got it right," as for me I did not understand at all. But of course after reviewing I still do not understand. (nah im joking), C and D both looked well to me, but of course I was way off.
@rickyrivas94 I felt very confident choosing C and was so surprised to see that was wrong. In blind review I chose D and felt pretty confident about that and was once again so surprised to see that was wrong. Brutal. The 5 star makes me feel a bit better, though haha!
can anyone explain if the newspaper subscriber's conclusion swapped to: "But there is at least one alternative hypothesis/explanation to Arnot's argument."
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
121 comments
Got it in blind review after googling "repudiates" means :[
got it in BR but dang
I'm still a bit confused why this isn't B. can someone explain?
@NolanWright
B isn't correct because there isn't a sufficient-necessary relationship in the stimulus. Rather the flaw in the argument is in the premise ("After all, the argument Arnot makes for this claim depends on the dubious assumption that government can be trusted to act in the interest of the public").
Remember that the flaw will always be in the support - and that support relationship is focused on the last two sentences, the first sentence is giving context as it is the opposing viewpoint.
If you still have a hard time with eliminating B, can you share what you find to be the sufficient-necessary relationship?
If you're thinking that this is the sufficient necessary relationship: fundamental change -> eliminating social ills
Then I would suggest redirecting your focus on the support instead, which is saying that there is a dubious assumption that the government can be trusted to act in the interest of the public. Where does it fit into in the sufficient-necessary relationship?
Lmk if that makes sense or not!
getting this right in time actually boosted my confidence so much
Basically subscriber did not like the argument Arnot gave
YES I GOT IT RIGHT WITHIN TIME this was a confidence booster
This question felt so obvious so quickly that I double guessed myself because I didnt think it could be that easy...ughh
@nedyvelazquez Right there with ya.. it just takes practice!
its so funny - i was like - its "a" proceeds to choose - whatever i chose and in BR i go - its a and still proceeds to choose whatever i chose.
First 5 star I got right LFG
@MaxSeltzerLaw we got this!
Correct with only 4 seconds over. Yes I just got lucky I know.
the key term AC's are so strange they show up very often in my drills and are almost never the correct answer which has since made me curious what it would look like when it is the correct answer.
"hopefully you got it right" ok bro
@ediffess lmao
Chat Gbt even got this one wrong. I picked B it choose C but the answer was A
@SubahEid WHAT GBT
yeah i got this wrong cause i didn't know what repudiates means lol
I still don't see why D is incorrect. Is it because the subscriber distorts a premise instead? He states that the claim (conclusion) depends upon a premise Arnot did not state (assumption that the government can be trusted to act in public interest). Any clarification would be great
@AlexanderFry I interpret distorting someone's argument as a situation in which other person said "X" but you claim the person said "Y." In other words, you're claiming they said something they didn't.
But claiming that someone made an assumption isn't a distortion of the other person's argument, even if it's wrong to say that the person made a certain assumption. (In this case it's also not clear that it's wrong to say the other person's argument made the assumption the author claims it makes. But even if it were, it's not a distortion.)
This is because you're still accurately portraying what they said. You may be wrong about the idea that what they said requires some other belief, but you're not changing what they said.
getting a level 5 difficulty question right is like solving quantum physics
@dexter310 actually lol'ed
@AliGoldberg W
@dexter310 lol
I was rlly confused on why D was incorrect, so I asked Chat, IK I'm not supposed to... but it helped. Sometimes I just need to see an example of the wrong AC to understand why it does not work with question. Hope this helps someone!
ARGUMENT:
Arnot argues that making fundamental changes in government would virtually eliminate major social ills.But this conclusion is false. After all, Arnot’s argument depends on the dubious assumption that government can be trusted to act in the public interest.
What the argument would look like IF D (straw man) were correct
Why THIS is straw man
Arnot is made to say something stronger and different than what he actually argued
“All social problems will immediately disappear”
“Government will always act perfectly”
Those exaggerations do not appear in Arnot’s real argument.
The speaker attacks that exaggerated version instead.
So to clarify is this a basic AOE flaw? the idea that you didn't prove your POV therefore mine is clearly correct? Also again (whenever I dont know the meaning of the word its ALWAYS the answer) not joking may be a legit test day thing if POE permits
I got it right in BR after I googled what "repudiate" meant.
I see some, "i got it right," as for me I did not understand at all. But of course after reviewing I still do not understand. (nah im joking), C and D both looked well to me, but of course I was way off.
@rickyrivas94 I felt very confident choosing C and was so surprised to see that was wrong. In blind review I chose D and felt pretty confident about that and was once again so surprised to see that was wrong. Brutal. The 5 star makes me feel a bit better, though haha!
CHAT I GOT IT RIGHTTTT and 36 SECONDS UNDER TIME.
Level 5, and I got it 9 seconds under the time. Chat, I fear I may not be cooked after all.
I only got this right because the lesson before this introduced the concept and I expected the question to reflect the lesson.
@Nickgigs yeah we were primed, but i'll take some fake confidence boosting anyime tho.
can anyone explain if the newspaper subscriber's conclusion swapped to: "But there is at least one alternative hypothesis/explanation to Arnot's argument."
Will that still be making (A) correct?
anyone have any tips for differentiating/identifying the different subgroup question types or is this just going to have to be memorization
like the part to whole - ad hominem - etc