Self-study
Archaeologist: The fact that the ancient Egyptians and the Maya both built pyramids is often taken as evidence of a historical link between Old- and New-World civilizations that is earlier than any yet documented. ███ █████ █████ █████████ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ██████ █████ ███ █████████ ███████████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ █████████ ███ ████████ ████████ ████ ███████████ █████ ███ ███████ ███████ ███ █████ ████████ ████ ████ ██ ████████ ████ █████ ████████████ ████ █████ ███ ██ ████ ████ ███████ ████ ███ █████████ ██████████████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The archaeologist concludes there’s no earlier historical link between Old- and New-World civilizations. She supports this by pointing out that Egyptian and Mayan pyramids were different in design and purpose: Egyptian pyramids were tombs for rulers, while Mayan pyramids were used as temples.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The archaeologist concludes that no historical link exists simply because the pyramids had different designs and uses. She ignores the possibility that the two cultures could still have influenced each other’s pyramids despite those differences.
This is also an example of the cookie-cutter flaw of concluding that an opponent’s conclusion is false, simply because you’ve wrecked their argument’s support. In order to conclude that no historical link exists, the archaeologist must assume that there is no other relevant evidence that supports it.
Analysis by EleanorRoberts
8.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ █ ████ ██ ███ ███████████████ █████████
a
The argument equivocates ████ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ███████████
b
The argument appeals ██ ███████ ██████ ████ ██ ███████
c
The argument assumes ███ ██████████ ██ ██ ██████ ██ ██████
d
The argument incorrectly ██████ ██ █████ █████ ████████ ███ █████ ██ ██████████
e
The argument presumes ████ ██ █████ ████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ █████