Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumStraw Man

Op-ed: The regional forestry commission recently suggested restricting commercial logging in the old-growth sectors of the Whispering Pines reserve during the spring nesting season of the spotted owl. The commission's proposal is completely unreasonable. Banning all timber harvesting in the region permanently would devastate the local economy and leave hundreds of mill workers unemployed. We simply cannot afford to shut down the entire timber industry.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the op-ed columnist's argument?

  1. It refutes an exaggerated version of the commission's proposal rather than addressing the specific limitations that were actually suggested.Answer
  2. B
    It attempts to weaken the opposing position by rejecting the foundational premise that the spotted owl requires protection during its nesting season.
  3. C
    It incorrectly assumes that a correlation between a logging ban and economic decline implies that the ban is the primary cause of the decline.
  4. D
    It draws a conclusion about the entire timber industry based on evidence that is relevant only to a small subset of local mill workers.
  5. E
    It relies on an ambiguous shift in the meaning of the term 'reserve,' utilizing it in two logically distinct ways over the course of the argument.

Answer

The correct answer is the option indicating that the argument refutes an exaggerated version of the commission's proposal rather than addressing the specific limitations that were actually suggested.
This option perfectly describes the Straw Man fallacy present in the stimulus. The original proposal is temporary (spring season) and localized (old-growth sectors). The columnist completely ignores these limitations, instead evaluating the economic impact of a permanent, region-wide ban. By substituting an extreme policy for a moderate one, the columnist makes the proposal much easier to defeat.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the scope of the original proposal.
The forestry commission's plan is heavily restricted: it applies only to 'commercial logging,' only in 'old-growth sectors,' and only 'during the spring nesting season.'
Identifying the exact parameters of the initial claim is essential to evaluating whether the rebuttal addresses it fairly.
2
Analyze the scope of the columnist's rebuttal.
The columnist attacks a policy of 'banning all timber harvesting in the region permanently' and shutting down 'the entire timber industry.'
Comparing the rebuttal to the original claim reveals any logical disconnects or distortions.
3
Identify the logical flaw committed by the columnist.
The columnist drastically broadens the scope and duration of the proposed restrictions, making the policy seem far more economically devastating than it would actually be.
Attacking a distorted, extreme version of an opponent's argument instead of the actual argument is the definition of a Straw Man fallacy.

Key Concept

Straw Man Fallacy
Rate this question

Topics

Straw Man

More questions from this topic