#18 - Education critics' contention that the use of

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

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

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

[AAron24!]

Hi,
Can you please explain this question? I chose answer C and am still a bit confused why this is wrong.

[Paul Marsh]

Hey AAron! So this is a Flaw question. Our correct Flaw answer choice has to actually describe what's happening in the stimulus. If any part of a Flaw answer choice describes something that isn't actually happening in the stimulus's argument, it's wrong.

(C) says that the argument "takes for granted that the advantages offered by new information-handling technologies always outweigh the disadvantages". But it never does this! The conclusion of the argument is that critics are wrong to say that calculators will undermine student's knowledge of the underlying rationale behind calculations. The argument never says the benefits of calculators outweigh the disadvantages; it never even says that calculators are a good thing! The argument is purely focused on discrediting that one critique of calculators, it never makes a judgment about calculators as a whole. So (C) is not describing something that actually happens in the stimulus.

(A), on the other hand, describes a Flaw that is actually occurring in the stimulus. The last sentence of the argument talks about the written language and its effects on people's ability to remember information. That has very little to do with math and calculators, so the argument is relying on a dubious analogy to make its point. This is what (A) is describing.

Hope that helps! Great username by the way.

[chowx128]

Hey AAron! So this is a Flaw question. Our correct Flaw answer choice has to actually describe what's happening in the stimulus. If any part of a Flaw answer choice describes something that isn't actually happening in the stimulus's argument, it's wrong.

(C) says that the argument "takes for granted that the advantages offered by new information-handling technologies always outweigh the disadvantages". But it never does this! The conclusion of the argument is that critics are wrong to say that calculators will undermine student's knowledge of the underlying rationale behind calculations. The argument never says the benefits of calculators outweigh the disadvantages; it never even says that calculators are a good thing! The argument is purely focused on discrediting that one critique of calculators, it never makes a judgment about calculators as a whole. So (C) is not describing something that actually happens in the stimulus.

(A), on the other hand, describes a Flaw that is actually occurring in the stimulus. The last sentence of the argument talks about the written language and its effects on people's ability to remember information. That has very little to do with math and calculators, so the argument is relying on a dubious analogy to make its point. This is what (A) is describing.

Hope that helps! Great username by the way.

I am a bit confused. Is the relevancy between calculator and written language explained in the middle sentence, that they are both examples of information-handling technology?

[Adam Tyson]

I'm not sure that written language and calculators are sufficiently similar to make that analogy good, chowx128, in which case the example of written language would still not be relevant, even if it could be considered an "information-handling technology."

But even if the analogy were good, the argument still fails to establish the relevancy of the evidence, because that fact that we've heard similar complaints before doesn't mean that those complaints are unwarranted. We would first have to establish that similar complaints in the past were always unwarranted, which the argument never does. Maybe the Greeks were correct about written language? Maybe other complaints about other technologies were also justified?

Put simply, when we look at the author's evidence, we could completely shrug it off and say "so what, that doesn't prove a darn thing in this case." That's a pretty good indication that the relevance of the evidence has not been established!

[babycorn]

I got this right when doing it timed, but during blind review, I chose E.

I thought the author concluded the critics' hypothesis is false because it contradicts other beliefs (that the advent of written language would erode people's capacity to remember information and speak extemporaneously) held by the critics. Is this answer wrong because I inferred that the critics wouldn't hold the belief that written language would lead to those negative effects? I thought it was safe to make that assumption because I felt it was commonsense that written language doesn't have those bad effects.

[Adam Tyson]

Answer E is incorrect, babycorn, for two reasons, one of which you already identified: we cannot safely assume that the education critics believe anything one way or the other about the relationship between written language and people's ability to remember and to speak.

But also, even if they DO believe what seems obvious in this case, that written language did not have those effects, that wouldn't indicate a contradictory belief, because it's possible to believe calculators will have the alleged effect even while written language did not have that other effect. That's because the comparison to written language isn't a good one due to the differences between the two concepts. The analogy isn't relevant, so there's no reason to think their beliefs would have to be in conflict. The flaw is in the use of an irrelevant comparison, rather than in any inherent conflict in beliefs.