#9 - Student representative: Our university, in expelling a

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Flaw in the Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (C)

This is a classic Straw Man argument, where the Dean takes the student representative’s argument (students should be allowed to speak their mind) and distorts/refashions it into something different (the university should endorse verbal harassment) and then argues against the distorted version.

Answer choice (A): The dean does not challenge the student representative’s knowledge of the expulsion process.

Answer choice (B): The dean’s entire argument is about speech, so other sorts of behavior are never mentioned. The error is that the nature of speech described by the student is twisted by the dean in providing a rebuttal.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. This is common Straw Man wording ("But what you're saying is..."), and the dean misdescribes the representative’s position (from allowing students to speak their minds to endorsing harassment) and argues against the misdescription.

Answer choice (D): This is not a source argument and there is no questioning of the Representative's motive in the stimulus.

Answer choice (E): The Dean never asserts authority or power, and certainly never makes any threats.

[reop6780]

Answer C denotes, "misdescribing the student representative's position.."

Which part of dean's statement is the description of student's position?

A: what you're saying is that our university should endorse verbal harassment.
B: Yet surely if we did that, we would threaten the free flow of ideas that is the essence of university life.

I'm confused since I cannot be sure in which part dean misdescribe student's position.

[Steve Stein]

Hi,

That's a good question--take another look at the Dean's lines: you may have skipped over the most important part!

The student rep says that it was wrong to penalize a student for speaking his mind.

Dean responds with: "but what you're saying is..."the schools should endorse harassment.

Is that really what the student is saying? The student says that one shouldn't be penalized for speaking one's mind, and the dean characterizes this as endorsing harassment, then argues against it.

If asked, most of us would probably support people's right to speak their minds without penalty...but that doesn't mean that we all endorse harassment. Thus the dean's response misrepresents the student's position so that it is easier to challenge (someone who is supposedly in favor of the school's endorsing harassment is easier to argue against).

I hope that's helpful! Please let me know whether this is clear--thanks!

~Steve

[reop6780]

Thank you for the instant reply!

I got so excited to solve my questions !

[DesignLaw806]

Howdy!

The question type is described as "Flaw in the Reasoning", however, in the stem, the words "questionable technique" are used. How would one not make the mistake of identifying this as a "Method of Reasoning" question type?

Thanks!

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi DesignLaw,

Flaw in the reasoning is very similar to method of reasoning question in how they are approached. In both cases, you are describing the reasoning in the stimulus. The only difference is that in a flaw in the reasoning question, you are describing the problem with the reasoning. It's still a description of how the argument works, but just has an extra factor to it: the flaw.

Hope that helps!
Rachael

[sqmusgrave]

Hi! I ultimately chose D because none of the others were viable, but I was thrown off by the fact that the student seems to admit the person"verbally harassed" his roommate when he says "in expelling a student who verbally harassed his roommate".

Had it said "in expelling a student for verbally harassing his roommate" D would have felt much better. To me the original wording used implies the student accepts the behavior as verbal harassment, and just thinks that people are allowed to do so to speak their mind.
This wouldn't be such an issue if it weren't for the fact that the correct answer is dependent on whether or not the student actually thinks speaking ones mind is verbal harassment. Because that's the core of the issue, I didn't think the test makers would write it in a way that leaves it so open to interpretation.

[Robert Carroll]

sqmusgrave,

Answer choice (D) is not a correct answer, so if you had any hesitation picking it, that's good! It wasn't correct.

That the expelled student actually did verbally harass his roommate is not at issue - both speakers seem to agree that's true. What's at issue is that the student representative never said the university should endorse that. The dean of students claims the student representative did say that, which just isn't true. This is why answer choice (C) is more than viable - it's correct.

Robert Carroll

[dshen123]

sqmusgrave,

Answer choice (D) is not a correct answer, so if you had any hesitation picking it, that's good! It wasn't correct.

That the expelled student actually did verbally harass his roommate is not at issue - both speakers seem to agree that's true. What's at issue is that the student representative never said the university should endorse that. The dean of students claims the student representative did say that, which just isn't true. This is why answer choice (C) is more than viable - it's correct.

Robert Carroll

Hi!
Is "threaten free flow of ideas" other sorts of behavior?

[Dave Killoran]

Hi D,

I'm not following your question here. Robert didn't mention "other sorts of behavior" but you've quoted him--can you explain your question here in a bit more detail please?

Thanks!