Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorArgument by Analogy

Read the philosopher's argument below carefully.

Philosopher: Proponents of strict bio-conservation argue that we have a moral duty to prevent the extinction of any currently existing species, as each species represents a unique, irreplaceable thread in the ecological tapestry. However, this is like arguing that a library must preserve every single manuscript ever written, regardless of its quality or the cost of preservation. Just as a library with finite space and resources must curate its collection, prioritizing works of significant historical or literary value to maintain a functional and useful institution, environmental policymakers, possessing limited resources, must prioritize the preservation of keystone species that are crucial for the stability of the entire ecosystem, rather than attempting to save every single species indiscriminately.

Match the components of the philosopher's library analogy (the base case) with their structural counterparts in the argument regarding bio-conservation (the target case).

  • Every single manuscript ever writtenAny currently existing species
  • Works of significant historical or literary valueKeystone species
  • A functional and useful institutionThe stability of the entire ecosystem
  • The library's finite space and resourcesEnvironmental policymakers' limited resources

Cevap

The correct mapping correctly aligns the structural roles: indiscriminate collection items map to any existing species; prioritized high-value items map to keystone species; the overarching goal of a functional institution maps to ecosystem stability; and the constraint of library space maps to policymakers' limited resources.
The correct mapping is structurally isomorphic. The author uses the absurdity of saving 'every single manuscript' to highlight the flaw in saving 'any currently existing species'. To solve the library's 'finite space', one saves 'works of significant value' to maintain a 'functional institution'. Similarly, to solve the 'limited resources' problem, one saves 'keystone species' to maintain 'ecosystem stability'.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the structure of the base case (the library analogy).
Identify the four key elements: the indiscriminate collection (every manuscript), the constrained reality (finite space/resources), the selective priority (works of significant value), and the ultimate goal (a functional institution).
Understanding the functional role of each element in the source analogy is necessary before mapping them to the target subject.
2
Analyze the structure of the target case (bio-conservation).
Identify the corresponding four elements: the indiscriminate collection (any currently existing species), the constrained reality (policymakers' limited resources), the selective priority (keystone species), and the ultimate goal (stability of the entire ecosystem).
Deconstructing the target argument reveals the structural slots that the analogy is meant to fill.
3
Map the corresponding elements based on their argumentative function.
Link the indiscriminate items together, the practical constraints together, the prioritized items together, and the ultimate goals together.
An argument by analogy relies on a structural isomorphism; matching elements must serve the exact same logical role in both domains.

Anahtar Kavram

In an argument by analogy, the strength and meaning of the argument derive from the structural mapping of relationships from a familiar base case to a complex target case. Correctly identifying these relational roles is essential for evaluating the argument.
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Argument by Analogy

Bu konudan daha fazla soru