PTC.S2.Q18 - Sid: The sign says "Keep off the grass."

Gracie567

I don't get this. I think the method is used a lot when people argue in everyday life. How come this is flawed?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”
Link: Forum Rules

casablanca-1

so what PT is this?

hotranchsauce

I took a look and got the correct answer, although slow (2 min). Here's what I came up with, feel free to disagree with my reasoning, maybe I was right for the wrong reasons:

(things in parenthesis are my internal monolog and shorthand)

Sid's argument is questionable in that it (Sid's idea is funky somehow, why?):

Sid: The sign says "Keep off the grass." (Don't grass)
Micki: I know, but just one person walking across the grass doesn't hurt it. (1 person can grass)
Sid: Your statement is false. If everyone believed as you do, everyone would walk across the grass, and the grass would die. (If everyone is you, then everyone would grass, therefore grass die, therefore you're wrong.)

Breakdown:

(Sid's idea is funky somehow, why?):

Sid: (Don't grass)
Micki: (1 person can grass)
Sid: (If everyone is you, then everyone would grass, therefore grass die, therefore you're wrong.)

Right away, see how Sid talks about everyone. Who is talking about everyone? Just Sid. As a matter of fact, Micki specifically said just 1 person. Why is Sid talking about every.single.person.in.the.world? That's a huge scope shift.

First Pass:

A - Hard to prove as correct or incorrect at a glance. Move on.
B - Hard to prove as correct or incorrect at a glance. Move on.
C - No. The argument is fluid, as in he's not outright contradicting himself.
D - No. There's no overlooking that "don't grass" is ok sometimes.
E - No. There's never any "name calling" here.

Second Pass:

A - No. The "statement about consequences" is Micki's statement. He's using Micki's statement as proof to therefore disprove something in his own argument? No, that is not what is weird about his argument. Sid is not trying to disprove himself with the proof of a statement.
B - Correct. Treats a statement about the consequences of an action as though it were instead about the consequences of everyone believing the statement (turns Micki's statement "1 person can grass" into a statement about everyone). He's basically putting words into Micki's mouth.