Summarize Argument
The author concludes people who say every discovery or invention is a form of self-expression shouldn’t be taken seriously unless they make their interpretation more interesting. Why not? Because everything a person does is somewhat self-expressive.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes people who say all discovery and invention is self-expression allow everything to count as self-expression. In addition, he assumes a claim about self-expression should only be taken seriously if it means denying that some things are self-expressive.
A
All claims that are trivial are uninteresting.
This doesn’t affect the argument. It implies the claim about self-expression is both trivial and uninteresting, but does nothing to establish that a trivial, uninteresting claim shouldn’t be taken seriously.
B
Most people do not take trivial claims seriously.
This is irrelevant. It doesn’t matter how many people do take the claim seriously—only whether people should take it seriously.
C
No claims that are trivial are worthy of serious consideration.
This makes concrete a key assumption: that a claim about self-expression shouldn’t be taken seriously if it allows everything to be self-expressive and is therefore trivial.
D
Every claim is open to both interesting and uninteresting interpretations.
This doesn’t support the assertion that a more interesting interpretation is required. The author may consider the interpretation provided interesting, but not interesting enough.
E
Every interpretation is either trivial or uninteresting.
If anything, this weakens the argument. It suggests the author asks the impossible by demanding those who claim discovery and invention are instances of self-expression craft an interpretation that is both not trivial and more interesting.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author believes that a recent article was incorrect when it claimed that there is no evidence the rate of extinction of animal species is increasing; in other words, the author believes that there is evidence that the rate of extinction of animal species is increasing. This position is supported by data on North American fish extinctions, which show more than double the extinctions from 1950-2000 than there were from 1900-1950.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s statement of disagreement with the article authors: “They are wrong.”
A
There is evidence that the rate of extinction of animal species is accelerating.
This accurately rephrases the argument’s conclusion. This is just another way of saying that the author disagrees with the claim that there is no evidence of an accelerating extinction rate.
B
The future rate of extinction of animal species cannot be determined from available evidence.
The author does not make this claim. Whether an exact future extinction rate can be determined is not discussed, the dispute is just over whether or not the rate is increasing.
C
The rate of extinction of North American fishes is parallel to the rate of extinction of all animal species taken together.
The argument is not designed to support this claim. While this might be taken as an assumption the author makes, nothing in the argument gives us a reason to believe that the North American fish extinction rate is representative.
D
Forty species and subspecies of North American fishes have vanished in the twentieth century.
This claim is not supported by the rest of the argument. The author states this number as a fact to help demonstrate the increasing fish extinction rate, but nothing else provides support for the claim of how many fish species have vanished.
E
A substantial number of fish species are in danger of imminent extinction.
The author never claims this to be true. The argument isn’t concerned with how many fish species are likely to go extinct soon, fish are just used as an example to demonstrate a general increase in extinction rates.