Examkin

Question

Difficulty: EasyUse of Counterexamples

Some business analysts claim that in order to build a highly successful technology startup, a founder must drop out of college to focus entirely on the business. However, this claim is clearly false. Consider the case of Elena Rostova. She founded a technology startup that is now valued at over a billion dollars, yet she completed both her undergraduate and graduate degrees before launching her company.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the method of reasoning used in the argument?

  1. It refutes a general claim by citing a specific instance that does not conform to that claim.Answer
  2. B
    It provides a specific example intended to support and illustrate the initial claim made by the analysts.
  3. C
    It relies on a single exception to establish that no successful startup founders drop out of college.
  4. D
    It offers contextual background information to explain why the business analysts formulated their claim.
  5. E
    It presents a specific historical case as the main conclusion of the author's argument.

Answer

The argument refutes a general claim by citing a specific instance that does not conform to that claim.
The argument introduces a universal rule proposed by analysts (that a founder 'must' drop out) and then immediately provides a specific case (Elena Rostova) that breaks this rule, thereby proving the rule false. This is the classic definition of using a counterexample, which is accurately described by this option.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The main conclusion is 'this claim is false,' referring to the analysts' assertion that a founder must drop out of college to be successful.
Understanding the conclusion is the first step to analyzing how the argument is structured.
2
Analyze the primary evidence (premise) provided to support the conclusion.
The author provides the specific story of Elena Rostova, who was highly successful despite finishing her degrees.
Identifying the premise reveals the specific method of reasoning the author is employing.
3
Determine the structural relationship between the premise and the conclusion.
The premise provides a single specific case that contradicts a proposed universal rule, thereby proving the rule false. This is the definition of a counterexample.
This structural relationship directly answers the question about the method of reasoning.

Key Concept

Use of Counterexamples
Estimated Time:1m 0s
Rate this question

Topics

Use of Counterexamples

More questions from this topic