Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The political scientist argues that decreasing voter turnout is entirely explained by people losing faith in the government’s ability to solve problems. This is because people losing faith in government’s ability to change public opinion, which they believe is necessary to solve society’s problems, is an example of something that causes people to lose enthusiasm for voting.
Identify and Describe Flaw
This argument is flawed because it treats a sufficient condition as if it were a necessary condition. In other words, the argument assumes that because a loss of faith in government’s ability to solve problems can cause people to lose interest in voting, that it must be what’s causing voter turnout to decrease in this case. However, there could be other conditions also sufficient to decrease voter turnout. The argument fails to consider possible alternative explanations for falling turnout.
A
presumes, without providing justification, that there is no cause of decreasing voter turnout other than the belief that few important problems can be solved by government action
This describes how the argument fails to consider other possible alternative explanations for decreasing voter turnout, instead assuming that a loss of faith in government must be what’s causing it.
B
presumes, without providing justification, that there are no political solutions to the most important problems
The argument isn’t concerned with whether or not these problems are solvable. It only makes a claim about what’s causing voter turnout to decrease.
C
infers that important problems can be seriously addressed if people’s attitudes do change from the premise that these problems cannot be addressed if people’s attitudes do not change
The argument only makes a claim about what’s causing voter turnout to decrease, not about whether any problems can or can’t be addressed. The flaw is failing to consider other possible causes.
D
undermines its claim that people no longer believe there are political solutions to important problems by suggesting that people are dissatisfied with politicians
People being dissatisfied with politicians does not undermine this claim; it could explain why those people don’t believe in political solutions.
E
presumes, without providing justification, that voter apathy prevents the attitudinal changes that result in finding solutions to important problems
The argument doesn’t presume that voter apathy has any particular effects; it only seeks to explain what’s causing the apathy.
Summarize Argument
The geophysicist concludes that asteroids strike the earth in a highly organized way, not randomly. She supports this by pointing to a unique pattern of impact craters that form a halo across the Northern Hemisphere.
Notable Assumptions
The geophysicist assumes that the unique pattern of impact craters could not have been caused by asteroids striking earth at random locations and are instead evidence of a highly organized natural process.
A
Several asteroid strikes within a short period could produce both volcanic activity that warms the oceans and atmospheric debris that blocks sunlight, and such changes could cause mass extinctions.
Irrelevant. The fact that asteroid strikes could cause mass extinctions tell us nothing about whether those strikes are random or follow a highly organized natural process.
B
If asteroids repeatedly pummel the same spots, the beating may affect the flow of molten rock inside the earth, which would affect the degree to which continents drift around the earth’s surface.
Irrelevant. The fact that asteroid strikes could affect continental drift tells us nothing about whether those strikes are random or follow a highly organized natural process.
C
The impact craters that form a halo-like swath across the Northern Hemisphere were the result of a single cluster of meteors striking the earth.
Irrelevant. This fails to address whether the single cluster of meteors struck randomly or followed a highly organized natural process.
D
Lumpy masses within the earth cause gravitational interactions with approaching asteroids that force them into specific orbits before impact.
This suggests that asteroids do strike earth through a highly organized natural process. If lumpy masses in the earth force asteroids into specific orbits, this determines where they will strike, which suggests that they do not strike at random locations.
E
No similar pattern of impact craters was created during any other period of the earth’s history.
Irrelevant. The fact that this pattern of impact craters is unique tells us nothing about whether it occurred randomly or as the result of a highly organized natural process.