The Little Blue Reasoning Book - Brandon Royal [64]
Choices A and E may appear tricky. Actually the author doesn’t deny his opponents’ figures or suggest his evidence is flawed. In fact, the author agrees with his opponents’ facts (test scores are getting higher). What the author is saying is that his opponents’ evidence is incomplete, not flawed. Choice D is not correct. The argument is not flawed due to circular reasoning. In circular reasoning, a conclusion is based on evidence, and that same piece of evidence is based on the conclusion. Choice D in this problem is incorrect for the same reason that choice E is incorrect in the previous problem, Cyclist. An argument that assumes what it seeks to establish is a circular argument.
Cause-and-effect fallacies exist when there is confusion about the causal relationship between two events. See if the argument is set up in terms of some situation “A” causing some situation “B.” Ask, “Is A really causing event B?” Show that A does not necessarily lead to B, and the argument is weakened or falls apart.
Here is a summary of how both arguments unfold:
Opponent’s argument:
Conclusion: Students are better skilled.
Assumption: There is a strong correlation between higher test scores and better skills. That is, parents are impressed because higher scores are an indication that students are better skilled.
Evidence: Parents are impressed.
Evidence: Test scores are getting higher.
Author’s argument:
Conclusion: Students are better test-takers, not better skilled academically.
Assumption: There exists no strong correlation between higher test scores and better skills.
Evidence: Studies confirm students are weaker in the basics.
Evidence: Test scores are getting higher.
Author’s note: SAT is a problem that serves to highlight the importance of identifying the evidence and conclusion, as well as the underlying assumption which links the evidence with the conclusion. In advancing another example, consider the person who says, “No wonder Todd chose to attend a good university; he was setting himself up for the good job after graduation.” We cannot assume that Todd went to university for the purpose of getting a good job afterward. He may have gone to university to play on a varsity sports team, with the hope of playing professional sports. He may have gone purely for the academic experience, with no vocational thoughts at all, and then again, he may have gone just to get away from home, meet new friends, and enjoy himself socially.
Let’s flow this example in terms of alternative causal explanations. Focus on each argument’s assumption.
Author’s original argument:
Conclusion: The reason Todd chose to go to a good university was to get a good job upon graduation.
Assumption: Going to a good university caused Todd to get a good job upon graduation.
Evidence: Todd went to a good university. He got a good job upon graduation.
To weaken this argument, we concentrate on finding an alternative explanation. There are at least three, as suggested below.
Argument #1: The sports person
Conclusion: Todd went to a good university for the purpose of playing on a nationally recognized varsity sports team.
Assumption: A person would not go to a good university and play on a well-known varsity sports team unless that was his or her primary motivation for doing so.
Evidence: Todd went to a good university. He played on a nationally recognized varsity sports team.
Argument #2: The academic
Conclusion: Todd went to university for the academic challenge.
Assumption: A person would not go to university and excel academically unless that was his or her primary objective for going to university.
Evidence: Todd went to a good university. He excelled academically.
Argument #3: The socialite
Conclusion: Todd went to a good university to improve himself socially.
Assumption: A person would not go to university and join several well-known clubs unless motivated