PT11.S4.Q17 - Journalists who conceal the identity...

andrea.leclerc-1

can someone help me understand this; i legit couldnt even get through the stimulus

cat_kimball

I found this question tricky too.

Accept for publication = P
High in plausibility = H
High in originality = O
High in interest to given audience = I

The teacher is arguing P -> H or O or I (aka law of anecdotes). Therefore, if journalists conceal a source's identity-> the journalist's reputation is depends on law of anecdotes.

The student responds with H ->
O-> P
I -> Therefore, no need to quote a source, just invent a story.

There are several flaws:
1. The teacher didn't mention anything about inventing stories. The context of which the teacher is speaking is about quoting sources. When the student says "But what you're saying is..." the student is altering the teacher's actual argument to mean something entirely different than what the teacher intended.
2. The teacher argues for H or O or I to be in the necessary condition. The student places H, O, and I in the sufficient condition.

A - False. What marginalistic journalistic practices? There are none in the stimulus.

B - Correct! Flaw 1. The student and teacher have completely different conclusions, however, the student tries to alter the teacher's argument with the verbiage, "But what you're saying is...". The student is pretending that the teacher made a different argument where no real sources are necessary.

C - False. Where are these reported statements and their characteristics?

D - False. Doesn't mention one extreme case.

E - False. Similar to flaw 2; however, remember the conclusion for the student is different. The student says no sources are necessary.

I hope that helps. I got this question wrong during a timed set, but figured it out during blind review.