Editorialist: News media rarely cover local politics thoroughly, and local political business is usually conducted secretively. These factors each tend to isolate local politicians from their electorates. This has the effect of reducing the chance that any particular act of resident participation will elicit a positive official response, which in turn discourages resident participation in local politics.

Summary

News media rarely thoroughly cover local politics, and local political business is usually conducted secretively. Each of these factors each tend to cause local politicians to be isolated from their electorates. Isolation from their electorates causes a decreased chance of resident participation receiving a positive official response, and this decrease in chance causes residents to be discouraged from participation in local politics.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

If news media more frequently covered local politics, or local political business were conducted less secretively, then at least one cause of discouragement from resident participation in local politics would decrease.

A
Particular acts of resident participation would be likely to elicit a positive response from local politicians if those politicians were less isolated from their electorate.

We don’t know whether an act would be likely to evoke a positive response if politicians were less isolated. We only know that the chance of evoking a positive response would increase, not that a positive response is likely.

B
Local political business should be conducted less secretively because this would avoid discouraging resident participation in local politics.

We don’t know how the Editorialist believes local political business should be conducted. The Editorialist is only listing consequences of conducting local political business secretively.

C
The most important factor influencing a resident’s decision as to whether to participate in local politics is the chance that the participation will elicit a positive official response.

We don’t know whether a positive official response is the most important factor influencing a resident’s decision to participate in local politics. We only know that the less of a chance there is of a positive response, the more discouraged residents are from participating.

D
More-frequent thorough coverage of local politics would reduce at least one source of discouragement from resident participation in local politics.

Since infrequent coverage of local politics is one cause of discouragement of resident participation, the absence of this cause would lead to at least a decrease of the effect.

E
If resident participation in local politics were not discouraged, this would cause local politicians to be less isolated from their electorate.

We don’t know if encouragement of resident participation in local politics would cause politicians to be less isolated from their electorate. We only know that politicians being isolated is a cause of residents being discouraged from participating in local politics.


82 comments

Gamba: Muñoz claims that the Southwest Hopeville Neighbors Association overwhelmingly opposes the new water system, citing this as evidence of citywide opposition. The association did pass a resolution opposing the new water system, but only 25 of 350 members voted, with 10 in favor of the system. Furthermore, the 15 opposing votes represent far less than 1 percent of Hopeville’s population. One should not assume that so few votes represent the view of the majority of Hopeville’s residents.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Gamba concludes that a Hopeville neighborhood association’s vote opposing the new water system should not be taken as evidence that the majority of Hopeville opposes the water system. This is based on the fact that only a small minority of the neighborhood association voted at all, and that the total number of opposed voters make up an extremely small minority of the city’s population.

Describe Method of Reasoning
Gamba counters Muñoz’s claim by pointing out a problem with the sample size of Muñoz’s evidence. Gamba reasons that not enough people voted against the new water system to represent even the entire neighborhood association, let alone the entire city, so it is inappropriate for Muñoz to draw conclusions about the entire city from that vote.

A
questioning a conclusion based on the results of a vote, on the grounds that people with certain views are more likely to vote
Gamba doesn’t address the motivation that anyone may have to vote a certain way. He instead claims that the vote itself cannot be trusted as an accurate reflection of the city population’s views.
B
questioning a claim supported by statistical data by arguing that statistical data can be manipulated to support whatever view the interpreter wants to support
Gamba doesn’t argue that any data has been manipulated at all, only that the data cited is not appropriate to draw conclusions about the whole city.
C
attempting to refute an argument by showing that, contrary to what has been claimed, the truth of the premises does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion
Gamba does not discuss whether the logical structure of Muñoz’s argument is valid. His focus is on Muñoz’s evidence not being adequate support for Muñoz’s conclusion.
D
criticizing a view on the grounds that the view is based on evidence that is in principle impossible to disconfirm
Gamba does not claim that the evidence cited by Muñoz is impossible to disconfirm, only that it is insufficient to support Muñoz’s conclusion.
E
attempting to cast doubt on a conclusion by claiming that the statistical sample on which the conclusion is based is too small to be dependable
Gamba casts doubt on Muñoz’s conclusion that a majority of Hopeville opposes the new water system, by claiming that the sample of residents who voted against the system is too small to dependably represent the whole city.

24 comments

Taylor: Researchers at a local university claim that 61 percent of the information transferred during a conversation is communicated through nonverbal signals. But this claim, like all such mathematically precise claims, is suspect, because claims of such exactitude could never be established by science.

Sandra: While precision is unobtainable in many areas of life, it is commonplace in others. Many scientific disciplines obtain extremely precise results, which should not be doubted merely because of their precision.

Speaker 1 Summary
Taylor concludes that we should be suspicious about the claim that 61% of info transferred during a conversation is communicated nonverbally. This is because that claim is mathematically precise, and we should be suspicious of all mathematically precise claims.

Speaker 2 Summary
Sandra asserts that many scientific disciplines can achieve extremely precise results, and that we should not be suspicious of these claims merely because of their mathematical precision.

Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about whether we should suspicious of all mathematically precise claims. Taylor thinks we should. Sandra thinks we shouldn’t.

A
Research might reveal that 61 percent of the information taken in during a conversation is communicated through nonverbal signals.
Sandra has no opinion. She doesn’t express an opinion about the specific claim made by researchers at the university. She only points out that there are some disciplines that can obtain precise results. Whether these researchers are part of those disciplines is unknown.
B
It is possible to determine whether 61 percent of the information taken in during a conversation is communicated through nonverbal signals.
Sandra has no opinion. She doesn’t express an opinion about the specific claim made by researchers at the university. She only points out that there are some disciplines that can obtain precise results. Whether these researchers are part of those disciplines is unknown.
C
The study of verbal and nonverbal communication is an area where one cannot expect great precision in one’s research results.
Sandra has no opinion. She doesn’t express an opinion about the specific claim made by researchers at the university. She only points out that there are some disciplines that can obtain precise results. Whether these researchers are part of those disciplines is unknown.
D
Some sciences can yield mathematically precise results that are not inherently suspect.
This is a point of disagreement. Taylor believes no mathematically precise claims can be established by science. Sandra believes some scientific disciplines can establish mathematically precise claims and that they shouldn’t be considered suspect merely because they’re precise.
E
If inherently suspect claims are usually false, then the majority of claims made by scientists are false as well.
Neither speaker has an opinion about the majority of scientists’ claims.

37 comments

Hospital executive: At a recent conference on nonprofit management, several computer experts maintained that the most significant threat faced by large institutions such as universities and hospitals is unauthorized access to confidential data. In light of this testimony, we should make the protection of our clients’ confidentiality our highest priority.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that our hospital should make protection of our clients’ confidentiality the highest priority. This is based on the fact that at a recent conference on nonprofit management, several computer experts said that the most significant threat faced by large institutions like ours is unauthorized access to confidential data.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the opinion of computer experts on what is the most important threat to hospitals should have weight in what a hospital should prioritize. This is flawed because we have no reason to think that a computer expert’s opinion on hospital management is something worth following. Another way to frame the flaw is that the author assumes what computer experts said is true. But what they said is the most significant threat does not have to be in fact the most significant.

A
The argument confuses the causes of a problem with the appropriate solutions to that problem.
The argument proposes a potential solution (making confidentiality highest priority) for the alleged problem of unauthorized access to data. But there’s nothing confused about the relationship between the proposed solution and alleged problem.
B
The argument relies on the testimony of experts whose expertise is not shown to be sufficiently broad to support their general claim.
The testimony is from “computer experts.” There’s no reason to believe these computer experts have expertise in hospital management. So, we have no reason to think what they claim is the most significant threat to hospitals is actually the most significant threat.
C
The argument assumes that a correlation between two phenomena is evidence that one is the cause of the other.
The premises do not establish a correlation, and the conclusion does not conclude or assume that there’s a causal relationship between two things. The premises merely describe what computer experts said at a conference.
D
The argument draws a general conclusion about a group based on data about an unrepresentative sample of that group.
The argument’s conclusion is not about a group. It’s about what one hospital should do (”we should make the protection...”). If you’re thinking the clients are the “group,” then (D) is still wrong because the premise doesn’t present a sample of clients.
E
The argument infers that a property belonging to large institutions belongs to all institutions.
The experts said that the most significant threat faced by “large universities and hospitals” is unauthorized access. The author assumes this comment is true about his hospital, but doesn’t assume that because it’s true about his hospital, it’s also true about all institutions.

88 comments