Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Deirdre concludes that the philosophers have been unreasonably pessimistic because their argument exaggerates the difficulty of achieving happiness. As an example, she notes that walking along the beach on a sunny day makes many people feel happy.
Identify and Describe Flaw
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of equivocation, where the author uses the same term in two different ways without acknowledging the shift in meaning.
Here, Deirdre says that the philosophers exaggerate the difficulty of being happy, noting that walking on the beach makes many people feel happy. However, the philosophers define happiness as "the satisfaction derived from fully living up to one’s potential," which is very different from the happy feelings that accompany walking on the beach. Deirdre doesn’t recognize the difference between these two meanings of "happiness."
A
It dismisses a claim because of its source rather than because of its content.
This is the cookie-cutter “ad hominem” flaw, where the author attacks the source of an argument rather than the argument itself. Deirdre doesn’t make this mistake; she attacks the philosophers’ argument, not the philosophers themselves.
B
It fails to take into account that what brings someone happiness at one moment may not bring that person happiness at another time.
Even if walking on the beach brings someone happiness one day and not the next, this isn’t a flaw in Deirdre’s reasoning. She just argues that because people sometimes feel happy walking on the beach, it’s untrue that achieving happiness always requires years of sustained effort.
C
It allows the key term “happiness” to shift in meaning illicitly in the course of the argument.
The philosophers argue that it’s difficult to achieve happiness, which they define as the satisfaction of living up to one’s potential. Deirdre then argues that many people feel happy walking down the beach, but this is an entirely different meaning of the key term “happiness.”
D
It presumes, without providing justification, that happiness is, in fact, the goal of life.
The philosophers argue that “the goal of every individual is to achieve happiness,” but Deirdre never assumes that happiness is the goal of life. She just argues that the philosophers are too pessimistic in their argument about achieving happiness.
E
It makes a generalization based on the testimony of a group whose views have not been shown to be representative.
Deirdre doesn't mention the testimony of any group. Instead, she draws a conclusion about the philosophers’ argument based on a factual example about the feelings of many people when they walk on the beach.
Marsha: But there are many forms of government under which citizens can be manipulated into believing they have a say when they don’t.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Elena believes that democracy is the best form of government. She believes this because the best form of government is one where the people believe they have a say in how it is run.
Marsha points out that many forms of government manipulate people into thinking that they have a say in how the government is run when they really don’t.
Marsha points out that many forms of government manipulate people into thinking that they have a say in how the government is run when they really don’t.
Identify Argument Part
This is utilized to weaken the relationship between Elena’s premise and conclusion. Marsha’s statement shows that just because a populace believes they have a say over government affairs, it does not mean that they *actually* do or are living in a democracy.
A
concur with Elena’s claim that democracy is the best form of government
Marsha does not say whether democracy is the best form of government. She challenges Elena's reasoning by suggesting that the feeling of having a say can be manipulated in non-democratic systems.
B
support Marsha’s unstated conclusion that the best form of government is one that appears to be democratic but really is not
This is not an unstated conclusion anywhere in Marsha’s argument. She is just pointing out an assumption in Elena’s reasoning
C
suggest that the premise Elena uses to support her conclusion could be used to support a conflicting conclusion
This is an accurate description of Marsha’s claim. She suggests that Elena’s premise could also support the conclusion that other forms of government could be considered the best if they manipulated their citizens to believe they were in control.
D
support Marsha’s unstated conclusion that most people seek only the appearance of democracy rather than democracy itself
This is not an unstated conclusion in Marsha’s argument. There is nothing about people wanting the appearance of democracy.
E
reject Elena’s conclusion that the best form of government is democracy
Marsha does not go this far. She is merely casting doubt on Elena’s reasoning that democracy is the best form of government.
A
fails to show that the mythical creature mentioned represents the horse in people’s minds
This highlights the assumption that the violence of centaurs represents horses, not humans. But since centaurs are half horse, half human, their violence might actually represent humans. This is even supported by “the nobility and gentleness traditionally ascribed to the horse.”
B
fails to consider that people might have good reason to fear horses
The author doesn’t fail to consider this. The claim that centaurs reflect an unconscious fear of horses doesn’t mean that people didn’t still have good reasons for their unconscious fear.
C
confuses the expression of unconscious thoughts with the suppression of them
The author argues that the centaur myth was an expression of people’s unconscious fear of horses. She doesn’t talk about the suppression of unconscious thoughts.
D
fails to demonstrate that the myth was not borrowed from one of the cultures by the others
The argument says that the centaur myth appeared apparently independently across cultures. But even if the myth was borrowed from one culture by the others, it wouldn’t affect the argument that it represents an unconscious fear of horses.
E
fails to explain why people use myth for the expression of unconscious thoughts
The author doesn’t explain why people use myth to express unconscious thoughts, but she doesn’t need to explain it and it wouldn’t affect her argument anyway.
Cookie Cutter Review
Weaken question where the argument describes a phenomenon and offer one hypothesis. (C) offers an alternative hypothesis.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that cattle egrets follows herds of cattle because the cattle herds’ grazing process offers the egrets with convenient access to insects. This is based on the phenomenon that cattle egrets live around herds of cattle.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes there is no other explanation for why cattle egrets live around herds of cattle.
A
Birds other than cattle egrets have been observed consuming insects stirred up by the movement of cattle.
This strengthens the argument. It shows that a number of bird species benefit in the same way from herds of cattle, strengthening the argument that this benefit is why cattle egrets live around herds of cattle.
B
Cattle egrets are known to follow other slow-moving animals, such as rhinoceroses and buffalo.
This does not affect the argument. Cattle egrets following other slow-moving animals does not make the author’s explanation for why they follow herds of cattle any less convincing. For all we know, buffalo and rhinoceroses also stir up insects that the birds consume.
C
The presence of cattle dissuades many would-be predators of the cattle egret.
This weakens the argument by offering an alternative explanation for the phenomenon. If living near cattle provides protection from potential predators, the egrets gain a significant safety benefit from their proximity to the herds.
D
Cattle egrets are not generally known to live outside the range of large, slow-moving animals.
This does not affect the argument. Cattle egrets’ propensity for living near slow-moving animals does nothing to weaken the author’s explanation for why they live around herds of cattle.
E
Forests are generally inhospitable to cattle egrets because of a lack of insects of the kind egrets can consume.
This does not affect the argument. The fact that forests are inhospitable to cattle egrets does not challenge the author’s explanation for why these birds live around herds of cattle.