Chai: The use of the word “tree” to denote both deciduous and coniferous plant forms, while acceptable as a lay term, is scientifically inadequate; it masks the fact that the two plant types have utterly different lineages.

Dodd: But the common name highlights the crucial fact that both are composed of the same material and have very similar structures; so it is acceptable as a scientific term.

Speaker 1 Summary
Chai claims that using the term “tree” to include both coniferous and deciduous plants isn’t sufficient for scientific use, even though it’s fine for day-to-day conversations. Why? Because the common term obscures the different origins of coniferous and deciduous plants.

Speaker 2 Summary
Dodd argues that using “tree” to mean both coniferous and deciduous plants is scientifically acceptable. Why? Because using the same term for both highlights their similarities in structure and material makeup.

Objective
We want to find something that Chai and Dodd disagree about. They disagree over whether it’s scientifically acceptable to include both coniferous and deciduous plants in the term “tree”.

A
it is advisable to use ordinary terms as names for biological forms in scientific discourse
Neither speaker makes this argument. Chai and Dodd are only talking about whether the specific term “tree” is scientifically acceptable, and neither comments on whether there’s a general rule about using ordinary names in science.
B
using the same term for two biological forms with different lineages can be scientifically acceptable
Chai disagrees with this, but Dodd agrees: this is the point of disagreement. Chai claims that “tree” is a scientifically unacceptable term specifically because it includes plants with different lineages. Dodd argues that it’s acceptable regardless.
C
both deciduous and coniferous plant forms evolved from simpler biological forms
Neither speaker directly makes this claim. Chai’s reference to “lineages” does imply that Chai agrees, though—but there’s no reason to think that Dodd would disagree.
D
it is important that the lay terms for plant forms reflect the current scientific theories about them
Neither speaker discusses this idea. Neither Chai nor Dodd talks about what goals lay terminology should accomplish, or whether or not those goals are related to science.
E
biological forms with similar structures can have different lineages
Both speakers likely agree with this. Although Chai doesn’t directly talk about structures, and Dodd doesn’t discuss lineages, neither one disputes the other’s factual claims about trees. This means they likely agree that trees have similar structures but different lineages.

4 comments

In a study, infant monkeys given a choice between two surrogate mothers—a bare wire structure equipped with a milk bottle, or a soft, suede-covered wire structure equipped with a milk bottle—unhesitatingly chose the latter. When given a choice between a bare wire structure equipped with a milk bottle and a soft, suede-covered wire structure lacking a milk bottle, they unhesitatingly chose the former.

Summary

A study examined monkeys given a choice between a bare wire structure with a milk bottle or a soft, suede-covered structure with a milk bottle as surrogate mothers. The monkeys chose the soft, suede-covered structure. In a separate experiment where the suede-covered structure did NOT have the milk bottle, the monkeys preferred the bare wire structure that still had the milk bottle.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

Monkeys prefer a milk bottle over softness of texture when choosing a fake surrogate mother.

A
Infant monkeys’ desire for warmth and comfort is nearly as strong as their desire for food.

This is anti-supported because the experiment shows that the infant monkeys rejected the comforting structure in favor of one that had food. This does not indicate a near equality in desires.

B
For infant monkeys, suede is a less convincing substitute for their mother’s touch than animal fur would be.

This is unsupported because the experiment never tested suede against real animal fur.

C
For infant monkeys, a milk bottle is a less convincing substitute for their mother’s teat than suede is for their mother’s touch.

This is anti-supported because the monkeys tended to prefer the bare structure with the milk bottle over the suede structure that had no milk. We also don’t know how convincing each structure was at replicating the real thing.

D
For infant monkeys, a milk bottle is an equally convincing substitute for their mother’s teat as suede is for their mother’s touch.

This is anti-supported because the infant monkeys tended to choose the bare structure with the milk bottle more than the suede structure without the milk, indicating an inequality in how convincing each substitute is.

E
Infant monkeys’ desire for food is stronger than their desire for warmth and comfort.

This is strongly supported because when the monkeys had to choose between a bare wire structure with food versus a soft structure that had no food, the monkeys chose the uncovered structure with food.


26 comments

Advertisement: At most jewelry stores, the person assessing the diamond is the person selling it, so you can see why an assessor might say that a diamond is of higher quality than it really is. But because all diamonds sold at Gem World are certified in writing, you’re assured of a fair price when purchasing a diamond from Gem World.

Summarize Argument
The advertisement concludes that customers are assured a fair price on diamonds at Gem World. This is because all diamonds sold at Gem World are certified in writing.

Notable Assumptions
The advertisement assumes that diamonds that are certified in writing are assessed by someone other than the person selling them. Moreover, the advertisement assumes that whoever sells the diamond at Gem World isn’t inclined to lie about the diamond’s quality. If the salesperson wasn’t obliged to provide the written certification, then they may well lie about the quality of the diamond.

A
Many jewelry stores other than Gem World also provide written certification of the quality of their diamonds.
The advertisement doesn’t say Gem World is alone in their practice. It simply says Gem World is preferable from a customer standpoint to most jewelry stores.
B
The certifications of diamonds at Gem World are written by people with years of experience in appraising gems.
This seems to strengthen the argument, but we have no idea if those people are associated with Gem World. If they get some commission on each diamond, they might be inclined to pretend the diamonds are of higher quality than they really are.
C
The diamonds sold at Gem World are generally of higher quality than those sold at other jewelry stores.
We don’t care how high-quality the gems are. We care if Gem World is in fact honest about the quality of each diamond.
D
The diamond market is so volatile that prices of the most expensive diamonds can change by hundreds of dollars from one day to the next.
We don’t care about the exact price. We care if Gem World is in fact honest about the quality of each diamond.
E
The written certifications of diamonds at Gem World are provided by an independent company of gem specialists.
The diamonds are appraised by an independent company that has no stake in how much each diamond sells for. Thus, we can accept that their written certifications probably aren’t biased in favor of Gem World’s business interests.

4 comments