Hector: You may be right about what the sculpture’s popularity means about its artistic merit. However, a work of art that was commissioned for a public space ought to benefit the public, and popular opinion is ultimately the only way of determining what the public feels is to its benefit. Thus, if public opinion of this sculpture is what you say, then it certainly ought to be removed.
Summary
Hector concludes that, if Monica is correct that public opinion dislikes a recent public sculpture, then the sculpture should be removed. Why? Because public art should benefit the public, and public opinion is the only way to tell what the public feels is beneficial.
Notable Assumptions
Hector uses a measure of what the public feels about a sculpture to indicate the actual benefit of the sculpture. This depends on the assumption that when the public feels a sculpture is not beneficial, that indicates that the sculpture is truly not beneficial.
A
no matter what the public’s opinion is on an issue affecting the public good, that public opinion ought to be acted on, even though the opinion may not be a knowledgeable one
Hector’s argument is based on the idea that the public benefit should be pursued, and relies on equating what the public thinks is beneficial to what is truly beneficial. That’s possible even without following public opinion no matter what—this assumption is unnecessary.
B
Monica’s assessment of the public’s opinion of the sculpture is accurate
Hector’s conclusion is phrased as a conditional, so it doesn’t depend on whether Monica’s assessment is accurate. It just wouldn’t be triggered if Monica’s assessment is inaccurate.
C
if the sculpture had artistic merit, then even a public that was not knowledgeable about modern art would not scorn the sculpture
Hector isn’t concerned with the sculpture’s artistic merit, just whether it benefits the public. That makes this, like (D), both unnecessary and irrelevant.
D
works of art commissioned for public spaces ought not to be expected to have artistic merit
Like (C), this is simply irrelevant, because Hector’s argument doesn’t involve whether or not the sculpture has artistic merit.
E
if the public feels that it does not benefit from the sculpture, this shows that the public does not in fact benefit from the sculpture
Hector infers that the public scorning the sculpture would mean the sculpture was not beneficial, on the basis that the public would not feel the sculpture was beneficial. This requires assuming that public feelings about the sculpture’s benefit actually indicate that benefit.
Summarize Argument
The drama critic concludes that audiences will enjoy Warner’s latest play about the disintegration of a family. Her support for this claim about audience enjoyment is based on the high quality acting. She references two aspects of the acting: the intense chemistry between actors, and Ziegler’s representation of the guilt and despair of the family.
Notable Assumptions
In this argument, the critic only discusses one aspect of the play (acting quality) and based on only that, concludes that audiences will enjoy the play. The critic assumes that the play isn’t missing some other aspect, like a strong plot, that is important for audience enjoyment. The critic also assumes that intense chemistry and convincing representations of guilt and despair are enough to demonstrate superb acting.
A
Generally, audiences enjoy romantic comedies but find tragedies upsetting.
This weakens the argument because it gives a reason that audiences may not enjoy the play, even if the play has strong acting. If audiences generally find tragedies upsetting, they may not enjoy the tragic aspects of Warner’s play, thus weakening the argument.
B
The company staging the play has an unbroken history of dull performances.
This weakens the argument because it introduces information that indicates that audiences may find the play dull. Audiences probably won’t enjoy a play that they find dull, so this weakens the argument.
C
Insiders with the company staging the play have condemned Ziegler’s performance as unexciting.
While Ziegler may convincingly capture guilt and despair, Ziegler could be doing so in a way that is unexciting. Even if a performance is convincing, if it is unexciting, audiences probably won’t enjoy it.
D
The plot of the play is similar in some respects to plots of Warner’s other works.
We don’t know if audiences enjoyed the plots of Warner’s other works, so this information does nothing for the claim about audience enjoyment for this latest play.
E
Audiences usually find drama critics’ reviews unreliable.
This gives reason to doubt the drama critic’s ability to predict how audiences will receive a play. The drama critic may find the acting superb, but if (E) is true, the drama critic’s opinion isn’t indicative of how audiences will react.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that good health is largely the result of making informed lifestyle choices. This is based on the fact that studies from many countries show a strong correlation between good health and high educational levels.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the correlation between good health and high educational levels is due to high education levels tending to cause good health. This overlooks the possibility that there’s an alternate cause that leads to both good health and high educational levels. This also overlooks the possibility that having good health improves one’s ability to seek higher education. The author also assumes that there’s an association between high education levels and making more informed lifestyle choices.
A
presumes, without providing justification, that only highly educated people make informed lifestyle choices
Although the author does assume that higher educational levels are indicative of a higher likelihood of making informed lifestyle choices, that doesn’t mean he thinks “only” those with higher education make informed lifestyle choices.
B
overlooks the possibility that people who make informed lifestyle choices may nonetheless suffer from inherited diseases
The author never suggests that people who make informed lifestyle choices will never have health problems. So, the possibility that they might have inherited diseases doesn’t undermine the reasoning.
C
presumes, without providing justification, that informed lifestyle choices are available to everyone
The author does not assume everyone can make informed lifestyle choices. The argument simply concerns the cause of good health. Even if some people aren’t able to engage in the behaviors that the author thinks leads to good health, that doesn’t undermine the author’s reasoning.
D
overlooks the possibility that the same thing may causally contribute both to education and to good health
The author overlooks the possibility that the correlation between good health and education is due to a thing that causes both good health and education (such wealth or genetics). This shows there doesn’t have to be a causal relationship between education and good health.
E
does not acknowledge that some people who fail to make informed lifestyle choices are in good health
The author assumes there is a causal relationship between informed choices and being in good health, but that doesn’t commit the author to believing this is the only cause of good health. The fact some people who make bad choices are healthy does not hurt the argument.