Read the following argument carefully:
Historians recently discovered that the sudden collapse of the prosperous Toralian trade network in the 12th century coincided precisely with a massive volcanic eruption. Because the eruption covered the Toralian region's primary agricultural centers in thick ash, researchers conclude that the eruption caused the trade network's collapse by devastating the local food supply.
Evaluate the following statement:
The newly uncovered historical record showing that a neighboring civilization—which was completely spared from the volcanic ash fall—maintained a thriving, uninterrupted trade network throughout the entire 12th century actively weakens the researchers' conclusion.
Cevap: Cevap
Cevap
The statement is False because the newly presented evidence strengthens, rather than weakens, the causal argument.
The statement is false because the new historical evidence demonstrates a scenario where the absence of the proposed cause (volcanic ash) is correlated with the absence of the effect (trade network collapse). In causal logic, this functions as a control case that strengthens the conclusion. Since the evidence strengthens the argument, the assertion that it 'actively weakens' the conclusion is false.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
Evaluating Causal Arguments (Strengthen vs. Weaken)
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s