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