Self-study
Zobel: Peterson's analytic concepts are wrong and should be rejected. ██ █ █████████████ ███████ ████████ █ ███ ██████████ ███ ███████ ██████████████ ██████ ██ █████ █████ ██████████████ ████████ █████ ██████████ ██████████ ████ ██████████ █████ ███ ███████ █████ ████████ █████ ████ ████ ████████ ████████ █████ ███ ███████████████ ██ █████ ███ ███████ ██████████ ███ ████████ ███████ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ████████ ██████ ██████ █████████ █████ ████ ███ ███████ ███ ███████ █████ ████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████ ███ █████████ ████████ ████████ ██ ████████ ██ ██ ████ ██████████ ███ █ ███████ ██ ████ ████████ █████████ █████ ███ █████ ██ ███ █████████ ████████ █████████
Summary
Zobel:
Peterson’s concepts are wrong and should be rejected.
Certain pyschoanalysts were convinced of Peterson’s concepts while training under her.
In the training, the teacher interprets the students’ actions, dreams, and fantasies.
This causes students to form strong emotional bonds with their teacher.
These bonds predispose students to accepting their teacher’s concepts.
This makes it impossible for these students to make unbiased judgments about their teacher’s concepts.
Very Strongly Supported Conclusions
Certain pyschoanalysts who trained under Peterson formed strong emotional bonds with her.
These pyscholanalysts were predisposed to accepting Peterson’s concepts.
It’s impossible for these psychoanalysts to make unbiased judgments about Peterson’s concepts.
5.
Based on the information in ███ ████████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ █████ ████ ██████████ ████████ ████████ ███ █████ ███ ██████ ██ █████████
a
The claim is ███████ ███████ █████ ███████ ███████ █████████████ ████ ███ ██ █████████ ██ █████ ██████████ ████████ █████████
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.
b
The claim has ███ ████ ███████████ ███████ █████ ████████ ████████ ████ █████ ████ ████ ████ ██████████ ████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ██████████ ████████ █████████
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.
c
The claim cannot ██ █████████ ███████ ██ ██ ███ ████████ ███ ███ █████████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ███████████████ ████████ █████████
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.
d
The claim is ████████████ ███████ ██ ██ ███████ ████ █████ ███ █ ████████████ ███████ ████ ████████ ███ ██████ █████ ██████████ ████████ ███████
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.
e
The claim is ██████████ ███████ █████ ███ ███████████ █████ ████ ██████████ ████████ ████████ ███ ██████ ███ █████ ██ ███████ ██████ ████ ████████ █████████
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.