Unsupported. Zobel never assumes that she is qualified to judge Peterson’s analytic concepts. Instead, she assumes that Peterson’s students’ assessments are wrong, simply because those assessments are likely biased.

Very strongly supported. Zobel shows that Peterson’s students may be biased in their evaluation of Peterson’s concepts, since their training predisposed them to accepting those concepts. But this doesn’t establish Zobel’s claim that Peterson’s concepts are wrong and should be rejected.

Unsupported. The claim that Peterson’s concepts are wrong cannot be evaluated, but this isn’t because psychoanalysts can never objectively assess each other’s concepts. Instead, it’s because Zobel’s evidence doesn’t actually support the claim that Peterson’s concepts are wrong.

Unsupported. We have no reason to assume that Zobel has a professional rivalry with Peterson. We also don’t know that her claim is questionable. We simply can’t assess the claim either way, since Zobel’s evidence doesn’t support the claim that Peterson’s concepts are wrong.

Unsupported. Zobel has not shown that Peterson’s concepts are biased. Instead, she’s shown that Peterson’s students’ assessment of those concepts are biased, since their training predisposed them to accepting her concepts.