Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The argument evaluates a hypothesis about why mechanist arguments in support of monarchies were so prolific. The author rejects the hypothesis that there were so many arguments because the principles of mechanism are in tension with democracy. The author instead claims the arguments multiplied because none of them worked. They didn’t work because the principles of mechanism support democracy.
Identify Argument Part
This is the claim that the author is rejecting and offering an alternative theory for. The author’s alternative theory for the proliferating arguments is that the arguments didn’t work because mechanism supports democracy.
A
It states a principle that the argument seeks to establish.
The argument rejects this claim. It is trying to establish that it is false by presenting an alternative explanation.
B
It describes a general phenomenon that the argument seeks to explain.
The author is trying to explain the proliferation of arguments, but he rejects the explanation contained in this claim.
C
It introduces a hypothesis that the argument challenges.
The argument presents an alternative hypothesis and rejects this idea of why the arguments proliferated.
D
It provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument.
This is what the argument is refuting. It doesn’t support the author’s claim, which is an alternative explanation.
E
It expresses the conclusion of the argument.
This is what the conclusion of the argument rejects and presents an alternative for.