Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardAd Hominem (Source Argument)

Columnist: Dr. Rostova argues that the city should not adopt the proposed biometric surveillance system, citing her extensive analysis of privacy breaches in similar municipalities. But let us not forget that Dr. Rostova is currently the lead plaintiff in a massive civil lawsuit against a major surveillance technology manufacturer, a case from which she stands to gain millions. Furthermore, she has built her entire public persona on opposing technological integration. Given her obvious financial and ideological biases, her analysis cannot be trusted, and her argument against adopting the system is thus entirely without merit.

The reasoning in the columnist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument...

  1. A
    takes for granted that Dr. Rostova's financial incentives are the sole cause of her opposition, when they may simply be correlated with her preexisting ideological stance
  2. B
    relies on an ambiguous use of the concept of 'bias' to transition from critiquing a person's motives to invalidating their empirical findings
  3. C
    treats the contextual details of Dr. Rostova's lawsuit as though they were structural premises upon which her analysis of privacy breaches depends
  4. D
    identifies a flaw in Dr. Rostova's ideological objectivity but fails to evaluate whether her financial motives present a more serious conflict of interest
  5. dismisses the validity of an argument solely on the basis of the motives and background of the individual advancing itAnswer

Answer

The correct answer is the option stating that the argument dismisses the validity of an argument solely on the basis of the motives and background of the individual advancing it.
The columnist's argument attacks Dr. Rostova's credibility by highlighting her financial interests (the lawsuit) and ideological biases (her public persona). The columnist then concludes that because she is biased, her actual argument—which is based on an extensive analysis of privacy breaches—is 'entirely without merit.' This is a classic source argument (ad hominem) flaw: attacking the proponent's motives rather than addressing the logical or factual merit of their premises. The truth of a claim or the validity of an argument does not depend on the motives of the person making it.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the columnist's argument.
The conclusion is that Dr. Rostova's argument against adopting the biometric system is 'entirely without merit.'
This sets the target for our evaluation of the argument's structure.
2
Identify the premises offered by the columnist in support of this conclusion.
The premises are that Dr. Rostova stands to gain financially from a lawsuit against a tech manufacturer, and that she has an ideological bias against technological integration.
To find the flaw, we must isolate the evidence used to justify the conclusion.
3
Analyze the logical relationship between the premises and the conclusion to locate the gap.
The columnist uses Dr. Rostova's personal motives and background to conclude that her empirical analysis of privacy breaches is false, without actually examining or refuting the analysis itself.
Evaluating how the premises fail to guarantee the conclusion reveals the vulnerability.
4
Match the logical gap to a recognized category of reasoning flaw.
The argument commits a source argument (ad hominem) fallacy by rejecting a claim purely based on the characteristics and potential biases of the person making it.
Standardized test answers will describe the flaw in abstract, generalized terms.

Key Concept

Ad Hominem (Source Argument)
Rate this question

Topics

Ad Hominem (Source Argument)

More questions from this topic