#20 - S. R. Evans: A few critics have dismissed my poems as

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Flaw in the Reasoning-SN. The correct answer choice is (A)

In this stimulus, S. R. Evans displays classic circular reasoning. The critics say she is not a poet, but she says only true poets are able to determine that. She has read their work and determined that they are not poets, so they should be rejected. However, in order for her to make that judgment, she would have to be a poet as well, which is what she is trying to prove. In other words, she assumes that she is a poet, so she has the ability to say that the critics who are saying she is not a poet are wrong. She presupposes (that she is a poet) what she sets out to prove (that the critics who say she is not a poet are wrong).

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. As stated above, only true poets can make the judgment about the critics work. So she presupposes that she is a true poet in order to prove that she is a true poet.

Answer choice (B) This would be the either/or fallacy, but it does not apply in this case. She is talking only about herself and a certain group of critics.

Answer choice (C) There is no implicit claim like this in the stimulus; it only talks about judging poets based on their work.

Answer choice (D) Again, this answer choice tries to tempt you with the either/or fallacy. The argument does not claim that a person cannot be both a critic and a poet; it simply claims that those critics whose work S. R. Evans has read are not poets because their work lacks poetic creativity.

Answer choice (E) There is no mention of "improving" poetry in the stimulus, which should immediately tell you that this is not the correct answer. We are looking for a flaw in the reasoning, not an inevitable conclusion that seems untrue. Furthermore, the stimulus does not lead to this conclusion. True poets can, in fact, criticize their own poetry.

[reop6780]

This is circular reasoning.
I chose answer A excluding others.
However, I cannot tell the presence of circular reasoning every time i see them.

I was supposed to find out that premise is the same as conclusion, right?

I figured "these critics...should be rejected" is thr conclusion.

Premise 1 - principle of criticism
Premise 2 - since these critics are not true poets


How come thr conclusion is repeating premise.....?

[Lucas Moreau]

Hi, Reop,

This one is a bit confusing at first, so don't worry that it gave you pause. Evans is saying that only a true poet can function as a critic of poetry, and that a true poet must have genuine poetic creativity. But if this is true, then on what basis does Evans criticize the work of the critics, calling it lacking in genuine poetic creativity?

Evans never provides evidence that he himself is a true poet who has genuine poetic creativity and can function as a critic of poetry. He merely assumes this to be true, then builds from this assumption to dismiss the critics who dismiss him as not being poets. His argument would not work without this first assumption.

Hope that helps,
Lucas Moreau
PowerScore

[lsatprobs]

So, I diagrammed this w/ conditional arrows because I thought that was the correct thing to do when I saw the word only.

So, I had:

Recognize poetic creativity OR Function as Critic -> True Poet

True Poet -> Genuine Poetic Creatrivity

So, if you aren't a true poet, you can't be a critic. Ok, got it.

Author says these people aren't true poets because their work does not have genuine creativity (according to her), so sure, not genuine creativity -> not a true poet.

I think I may have just thought way too much into this. Can someone explain? Thanks!

[nicholaspavic]

Hi probs,

This is a flaw-in-the-reasoning question and oftentimes, conditional logic is not going to be an aid to you on these. This is because jumping into diagramming and really not sitting back and assessing the stimulus is a big mistake. So when you see that "vulnerable to criticism" language in a question stem, you should stop and ask yourself, wait is this actually a terrible argument? And guess what? It is. S.R. Evans may be a great poet but she's certainly not a logician.

Evans is really arguing that only true poets can recognize another "true" poet and since none of her critics can make great poetry, they are not true poets nor can they recognize a true poet's poem. See the problem there? Evans' argument assumes that she is a great poet who can recognize great poetry. So it's an ouroboros of circular logic, not a straight, conditional arrow.

Thanks for the great question and let us know if this helps!

[rpark8214]

Hi,

I am having trouble with the line "presupposes what it sets out to conclude." I know this is an indicator of circular reasoning, but I was not sure how the CR flaw fit into the stimulus (Evans assumes he is a true poet, but his conclusion is that the critics' judgement should be rejected, not that he is therefore a true poet). Can you clarify how the premise and the conclusion are identical in meaning?

Much appreciated!

[Daniel Stern]

S.R.'s logic is circular because he assumes he is a true poet when he assesses the critic's work: the stimulus states,

But I have read the work of these critics; none of it demonstrated poetic creativity

when his principle was that only true poets can assess whether this is true. So it boils down to: don't believe the critics who say I'm not a true poet, because only true poets can criticize, and I deem these guys not to be true poets (in the process I assume that I am a true poet myself).

I hope that helps.
Best,
Dan

[annabelle.swift]

I understand the correct answer choice, but I have a question about the stimulus. I diagrammed "the only true poets are those whose work conveys genuine poetic creativity" as "genuine poetic creativity true poet" due to the indicator word "only."

However, after reading this Powerscore reply,

Evans is saying that only a true poet can function as a critic of poetry, and that a true poet must have genuine poetic creativity.

I felt I should have diagrammed this relationship as "true poet genuine poetic creativity" due to the indicator word "must." How can I sort out this diagram? Or is it impossible to diagram circular reasoning like Nicholas hinted?

[Adam Tyson]

The phrase "the only" causes a lot of confusion, so you are not alone there! Some people say to treat it as a sufficient condition indicator because it is immediately before the sufficient condition in the sentence. Our approach is to treat it as an indicator of a necessary condition because it still refers to the thing that is required (the only thing, the only way, the only person, etc.), and that the sufficient condition is just sitting between the indicator and the thing indicated.

Here's how I like to handle it: ask yourself "who are the only true poets?" The answer to that question will be your necessary condition, since they will be the only ones and are, therefore, necessary. In this case, "the only true poets" are the ones with "genuine poetic creativity," so genuine poetic creativity is the necessary condition.

You can read more about this phrase and other tricky conditional situations in the "Additional Reading" portion of the Lesson 2 homework in the Online Student Center (if you are one of our course students or have either a tutoring package of the testing and analytics package).