- Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:42 am
#42846
Please review my rationale and what can I do to: 1. get to the correct answer. 2. If my rephrasing of the stimulus is correct, what type of reasoning would deviate one from the wrong answer choice, such as the one I picked. Thanks.
As for the question stem, it is a Flawed Method of Reasoning, so the stimulus states:
P1: That the radiation absorbed by someone during an ordinary commercial flight is no more dangerous than when an individual receives during an X-ray.
P2: Dental X-ray does negligible harm.
Conclusion: Taking premise 2, the use that to support the fact that commercial airlines poses the same trait.
The issues with this reasoning is possibly three-fold:
First, the very obvious one, just because both commercial airlines and dental X-ray share omitting radiation during an ordinary process that is quite similar in its danger to someone, doesn't mean that they are the same in every other way. e.g. do negligible harm.
Second, the word negligible harm to someone isn't clarified in terms of frequency of enduring the radiation. Suppose a businessperson flies 3X a week, but gets his/her dental exam every six-months. Under both events the businessperson endures negligible harm, but there could be a compounding effect, that might constitute that "someone" to undergo negligible harm under dental X-ray and a more severe harm under ordinary commercial airline flight.
Finally, this one might seem unwarranted, but could technically be scrutinized, and that is the use of the word "someone" and "ordinary." While "someone" is constituted as anyone, which isn't the same as say the word "average," and "ordinary," which could be constituted as what is deemed normative, and in that case would make the "someone's" action refer to it as the average, but if we took the word "ordinary" and applied it to "someone" meaning anyone, then what is deemed as "ordinary" is more so based on subjective interpretation of that "someone's" habits then say the average.
Nevertheless, I looked at this and thought to myself, it would touch on the first issue, but needless to say it didn't. I chose "B," because while nothing conformed to what I saw as an issue with this stimulus, at least this answer choice tangentially touches on the second issue by saying, it overlooks the fact that dental X-ray could avoid health risks that commercial flight doesn't. Obviously, it is wrong, because that isn't the correct answer. Answer choice D touches on my frequency issue I bought up, but how do I go about reconciling such dilemmas? And, what was your rationale in picking answer choice D over B?
Thanks
As for the question stem, it is a Flawed Method of Reasoning, so the stimulus states:
P1: That the radiation absorbed by someone during an ordinary commercial flight is no more dangerous than when an individual receives during an X-ray.
P2: Dental X-ray does negligible harm.
Conclusion: Taking premise 2, the use that to support the fact that commercial airlines poses the same trait.
The issues with this reasoning is possibly three-fold:
First, the very obvious one, just because both commercial airlines and dental X-ray share omitting radiation during an ordinary process that is quite similar in its danger to someone, doesn't mean that they are the same in every other way. e.g. do negligible harm.
Second, the word negligible harm to someone isn't clarified in terms of frequency of enduring the radiation. Suppose a businessperson flies 3X a week, but gets his/her dental exam every six-months. Under both events the businessperson endures negligible harm, but there could be a compounding effect, that might constitute that "someone" to undergo negligible harm under dental X-ray and a more severe harm under ordinary commercial airline flight.
Finally, this one might seem unwarranted, but could technically be scrutinized, and that is the use of the word "someone" and "ordinary." While "someone" is constituted as anyone, which isn't the same as say the word "average," and "ordinary," which could be constituted as what is deemed normative, and in that case would make the "someone's" action refer to it as the average, but if we took the word "ordinary" and applied it to "someone" meaning anyone, then what is deemed as "ordinary" is more so based on subjective interpretation of that "someone's" habits then say the average.
Nevertheless, I looked at this and thought to myself, it would touch on the first issue, but needless to say it didn't. I chose "B," because while nothing conformed to what I saw as an issue with this stimulus, at least this answer choice tangentially touches on the second issue by saying, it overlooks the fact that dental X-ray could avoid health risks that commercial flight doesn't. Obviously, it is wrong, because that isn't the correct answer. Answer choice D touches on my frequency issue I bought up, but how do I go about reconciling such dilemmas? And, what was your rationale in picking answer choice D over B?
Thanks