Self-study
In order to control the deer population, a biologist has proposed injecting female deer during breeding season with 10 milligrams of a hormone that would suppress fertility. ███████ ████ ███████ ████ ███ ████████ █████ ██████ █████ ██ ██████ ███ █████ ███ ███ ████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ███████ ██████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████████ ███ █████████ ███ █████████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ████████ ███ ████ ██████ ███ ██████ ██ ██ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████ █ ███ ███████ ███ ███████ ████████ ███ █████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ████ ███ ██████ ████ █ ████ ███ █████████ █████ ██ █████
Argument Structure
This stem tells us a lot about the stimulus. It tells us a biologist will make a proposal, people will criticize that proposal for some reason, the biologist will respond to that criticism, and that response will feature invalid reasoning. Here’s a summary laying out those elements and the argument’s overall structure:
Proposal: Let’s add 10mg of hormone to these deer.
Criticism: It’s dangerous for people to consume too much hormone.
Response:
Premise: Consuming up to 10mg per day is safe.
Premise: No one is gonna eat a whole deer.
________
(Implicit Inference: No one is gonna consume more than 10mg of hormone per day.)
Conclusion: Adding 10mg of hormone to these deer is safe.
We can test the validity of any given argument by asking “is there some possible world where the conclusion is not true even though the premises are true?” Applying this test to the stimulus yields a solid direction for anticipating the answer:
Is there some way people could end up consuming more than 10mg of hormone per day even if they’re not eating an entire deer?
18.
The biologist’s response to critics ██ ███ ████████ ██ █████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ████████████
a
People would be ████████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ████ ██ █████ ████ ████ ██ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ████████
This would be a good answer to a strengthen question – if this were true, we’d have an additional reason to think people will be able to avoid consuming dangerous amounts of hormone.
It doesn’t need to be true, though. The biologist’s argument relies on the idea that regardless of whether they’re aware of the hormone injections or not, no one is gonna eat a whole deer in a day.
b
The hormone that █████ ██ ████████ ████ ███ ████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ██ ████████ ████ ██ █████ ███████████████
It’s quite useful to remember we can use the MSS standard for necessary assumption questions – correct answer choices must be strongly supported by the claims in the stimulus. (B) goes off on a limb and makes a very specific claim that isn’t supported at all. Maybe the hormone is akin to human contraceptives, maybe not; either way it has no bearing on the argument.
c
Hunting season for ████ █████ ██ █████████ ██ ████ ██ █████ ███ ████████ ████ ████████ ███████
This would be a good answer to a strengthen question – if this were true, we’d have an additional reason to think people will be able to avoid consuming dangerous amounts of hormone.
It doesn’t need to be true, though. The biologist’s argument relies on the idea that regardless of whether they’re hunting injected deer or not, no one is gonna eat a whole deer in a day.
d
The hormone in ████████ ████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ ███ ██████ ████ ████ █████ ██ █████████
(D), when negated, suggests a possible world in which people could end up consuming more than 10mg of hormone per day even if they’re not eating an entire deer.
If the hormone does occur naturally in the injected deer – that’s us negating (D) – then the total hormone people consume might be much higher than the amount the biologist plans to add.
e
Most people do ███ ████████ ████ ████ ██ ██ ████ ██ █████ █████ ████ ███ ███ ██ ████ ██ ████ ██████████
Safety, as it’s defined in the premises, is determined by how much hormone people consume per day. The biologist’s own premises reflect this – they establish that no one will eat a whole deer in a day. (E) guards needlessly against potential cumulative effects that might arise from consuming a lot of deer over many days, but those are already accounted for in the premise saying consuming up to 10mg of hormone per day is safe.