Science teacher: An abstract knowledge of science is very seldom useful for the decisions that adults typically make in their daily lives. But the skills taught in secondary school should be useful for making such decisions. Therefore, secondary school science courses should teach students to evaluate science-based arguments regarding practical issues, such as health and public policy, instead of or perhaps in addition to teaching more abstract aspects of science.
Which one of the following is an assumption the science teacher's argument requires?
Secondary schools should teach only those skills that are the most useful for the decisions that adults typically make in their daily lives.
Too strong. The science teacher is not recommending these lessons at the exclusion of all other things—she says “instead of or perhaps in addition to.”
Also, the standard is not that they be “the most useful” skills, just that they are useful.
Teaching secondary school students the more abstract aspects of science is at least as important as teaching them to evaluate science-based arguments regarding practical issues.
If anything, (B) would weaken our argument. (B) increases the appeal of abstract knowledge, whereas the science teacher is advocating for evaluating practical, science-based arguments.
Adults who have an abstract knowledge of science are no better at evaluating science-based arguments regarding practical issues than are adults who have no knowledge of science at all.
This isn’t a necessary comparison. It isn’t necessary to compare anything to adults without science knowledge. We are comparing two types of science knowledge, and arguing that one (evaluating a practical, science-based argument)t is preferable to the other (abstract knowledge).
No secondary school science courses currently teach students how to evaluate science-based arguments regarding practical issues.
It isn’t necessary for this to be a new approach. The science teacher is advocating for what should be done, regardless of whether some schools already do it.
The ability to evaluate science-based arguments regarding practical issues is sometimes useful in making the decisions that adults typically make in their daily lives.
This must be true. If it isn’t, then there’s no connection between the teacher’s recommendation and her reason for recommending it. If analyzing practical and science-based arguments doesn’t have utility for daily decisions, there’s no reason to recommend this approach.