Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Critics argue that Sauk’s work doesn’t have aesthetic merit, because it uses certain symbolic motifs of an artist that Sauk followed, but to further a political ideal that that artist would disagree with. The author rejects the critics argument, because the critics haven’t shown that the use of the same symbolic motifs for a purpose that the artist would reject would decrease aesthetic merit of Sauk’s work.
Describe Method of Reasoning
The author criticizes the critics’ argument by pointing out that the critics’ premise, even if it’s true, doesn’t provide any support to the critics’ conclusion. The fact Sauk uses the same symbolic motifs hasn’t been shown to affect the aesthetic merit of Sauk’s work.
A
the claims made in support of this conclusion are inaccurate
The claim made in support of the critics’ conclusion is that Sauk’s work uses symbolic motifs in service of politics that are different from those of the person Sauk imitated. The author doesn’t disagree with this claim. He disagrees that this claim is relevant to the conclusion.
B
Sauk’s work has aesthetic merit
The author’s argument doesn’t rely on the grounds that Sauk’s work has aesthetic merit. It relies on the grounds that it hasn’t been shown that imitating symbolic motifs that the original artist would disagree with decreases aesthetic merit of a work.
C
these critics are motivated by antipathy toward Sauk’s political ideas
The author never alleges that the critics are motivated by antipathy. Although he acknowlges that the critics would reject Sauk’s politics, that doesn’t mean this difference of political opinion motivates the critics in their argument.
D
the claims made in support of this conclusion have not been shown to be correct
The claim made in support of the critics’ conclusion is that Sauk’s work uses symbolic motifs in service of politics that are different from those of the person Sauk imitated. The author concedes that this is true (line beginning “Granting...”).
E
the claims made in support of this conclusion have not been shown to be relevant to it
The author believes the fact Sauk imitated an artist who would disagree with Sauk’s politics hasn’t been shown to decrease aesthetic merit. Thus, it hasn’t been shown to be relevant to the critic’s conclusion that Sauk’s work lacks aesthetic merit.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The police chief hypothesizes that the 20% reduction in crime is a result of her policing strategy. She offers no support for this claim.
Notable Assumptions
The police chief assumes that the reduction in crime owes to her policing strategy rather than to some other factor (e.g. economic prosperity in the city, generally falling crime rates in the country, other changes in the justice system).
A
The crime rate in the police chief’s city is still significantly higher than in many other cities.
The police chief’s policing strategy can still have caused a 20% reduction in crime, even if that reduction leaves the city with an above-average crime rate.
B
The crime rate in the police chief’s city is higher now than it was several decades before the chief’s tenure began.
Like (A), the police chief’s policing strategy can still have caused a 20% reduction in crime while leaving the city with a higher crime rate than several decades earlier.
C
The crime rate in the police chief’s city fell significantly during the first few years of the chief’s tenure, then it leveled off.
We don’t care how the police chief got to the 20% reduction over the years. We simply care that the reduction was an effect of her policing strategy.
D
The crime rate in the country as a whole fell by about 30 percent during the police chief’s tenure.
The police chief’s strategy likely wasn’t what caused the 20% crime reduction, given that crime fell by 30% around the country. In fact, the police chief’s strategy appears to have resulted in a milder reduction than those employed around the country.
E
The variation in crime rates between different areas of the city is smaller in the police chief’s city than in many other cities.
This supports the police chief’s claim. By targeting particularly high-risk areas, the police chief lowers variation between different areas of the city. This could’ve caused the 20% reduction.