Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaFlaw in the Reasoning

Biologist: Some critics argue that the process of human evolution is "just a theory" and therefore should not be taught in schools as an established fact. But these critics are completely misguided. The phenomenon of gravity is also described by a theory—the theory of general relativity—yet no reasonable person argues that we should doubt that dropped objects will fall to the ground. Therefore, the critics' rationale for dismissing human evolution is invalid.

Which of the following best describes the logical flaw in the biologist's argument?

  1. A
    It treats a condition that is sufficient to establish a scientific fact as if it were a necessary condition.
  2. B
    It mistakenly relies on an analogy that fails to address the core logic of the critics' position.
  3. C
    It infers a causal relationship between the formal designation of a scientific concept and its observable effects.
  4. It trades on two distinct meanings of a key term used in the argument.Cevap
  5. E
    It confuses the critics' main conclusion with a subsidiary premise used to justify their stance.

Cevap

The argument trades on two distinct meanings of a key term used in the argument.
The biologist's argument commits an equivocation fallacy. It conflates the colloquial usage of the word 'theory' (meaning an unproven guess or hypothesis), which is how the critics are using it, with the strict scientific usage of the word 'theory' (meaning a well-substantiated framework of facts), which is how the biologist uses it regarding gravity. By allowing the meaning of this key term to shift, the biologist fails to genuinely address the critics' argument.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the critics' premise as presented by the biologist.
The critics use the word 'theory' to mean an unproven hunch or guess.
Identifying the original context is necessary to understand the critics' claim.
2
Analyze the biologist's counter-argument.
The biologist uses the theory of general relativity as an example of a 'theory' that is universally accepted as a fact.
This reveals how the biologist defines the term in their rebuttal.
3
Compare the usages of the key term in both parts of the argument.
The critics use 'theory' to mean 'unproven idea', while the biologist uses 'theory' to mean 'a well-substantiated scientific framework'.
Identifying this discrepancy highlights the logical flaw.
4
Select the option that describes this flaw.
The correct option states that the argument trades on two distinct meanings of a key term.
This accurately describes the equivocation fallacy present in the stimulus.

Anahtar Kavram

Equivocation (Flaw in the Reasoning)
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Flaw in the Reasoning

Bu konudan daha fazla soru