PT11.S4.Q17 - teacher: journalists who conceal

dennisgerrard

Failed to understand student's argument. Any insight will be appreciated.

akistotle

I think this is more of a weakening question. (Now I really understand why 7Sage calls "Descriptive Weakening"!)

The teacher concludes that a journalist who doesn’t reveal his/her source, he/she relies on so-called "logic of anecdotes.” This is because a quote which doesn’t have a source is not associated with the situation the quote was made, so if it were to be accepted by publication, it must be plausible, original, or interesting (= good anecdote).

Accepted for publication —> Plausible, original, or interesting

The student counter-argues that if the teacher were correct, then journalists don’t need sources because they can make up stories that seem plausible, original, or interesting.

How can we weaken his argument? For example, what if the teacher thinks journalists cannot make up stories? Maybe the teacher thinks quotes mentioned in articles have to be true in order to be published.

Accepted for publication —> There must be sources

I think the flaw here is that the student is ignoring that there may be so many other necessary assumptions in the teacher's argument. The teacher did not say "Plausible, original, or interesting —> Accepted for publication."

And the answer choice (B) says the students ignores the possibility that the teacher thinks in order for a statement to be published, it’s necessary that the statement was actually made.

Hope this helps!

dennisgerrard

@akistotle Thank you so much. When I first read the stimulus, I didn't catch the conditional statement as you did. I was trapped by wordy language of student. I actually read your explanation twice to strengthen my understanding.

Again, thanks for your detailed answer:)