Attacking or Bolstering a premise

[bstampfl]

Hi all,

Is it acceptable on a Strengthen Q for the correct AC to bolster a premise? Likewise, is it acceptable on a Weaken Q for the correct AC to undermine a premise?

My understanding at this point is that it's okay to undermine a premise on Weaken but not okay to bolster a premise on Strengthen. I just want to get a firm answer on these two questions. Also, the reason why I think you can attack a premise on Weaken Qs is because of PT 75, section 3, question 13, about the University Administrator's opinions on teaching assistants.

Lastly, is there a question type besides Strengthen/Weaken where we can attack premises?

Thank you!

[Dave Killoran]

Is it acceptable on a Strengthen Q for the correct AC to bolster a premise? Likewise, is it acceptable on a Weaken Q for the correct AC to undermine a premise?

Yes and Yes Although in practice they do less with premises than with conclusions.

Lastly, is there a question type besides Strengthen/Weaken where we can attack premises?

Not really, although Evaluate questions feature elements of both and so could be said to qualify. Flaw questions will ask you to point out why arguments are problematic, which can also include pointing out problems with premises. But not in the active way you are talking about with Weaken here.

Thanks!

[bstampfl]

Thanks Dave!

So, to be clear, it is alright to bolster a premise on a Strengthen Q? I feel as though I've seen a lot of question explanations that say an AC is wrong because it's a "premise-booster" ... I guess this specific explanation is not enough to explain why an AC is wrong?

[Adam Tyson]

Is it okay to strengthen a premise? Yes. But that is almost never the source of the correct answer, because supporting a premise has nothing to do with whether that premise supports the conclusion, and it is the conclusion that you want to help out in a Strengthen question. If you have no better answer choice available than one that helps a premise, then that would be the best answer and you should select it, but before you do I would encourage you to look again and see if there is an answer that instead of helping a premise helps to improve the argument as a whole. Something that adds evidence to support the conclusion, or that explains why the premises support the conclusion. Here's an extreme example:

Koalas are mammals. Therefore, koalas make good police officers.

Totally weird argument, right? If asked to strengthen it, would it help any if you were to learn that koalas are warm-blooded, and so are mammals? Or that mammals give birth to live young, and so do koalas? Or that 1000 well respected biologists have all agreed that koalas are mammals? All of these help the premise that koalas are mammals. But do any of them do anything to help the claim that koalas make good police officers? Not even the slightest bit. We have to focus on that conclusion, and say something like "mammals make the best police officers" or "any mammal would be an okay police officer." Strengthen the argument overall, which means supporting the relationship between the premises and the conclusion. Strengthening a premise does not generally accomplish that goal.

In a few "Weaken-EXCEPT" questions you may eliminate answers that attack premises, because when a premise is flawed it can hurt the argument, but most of the time we are really looking to show that the premises, even if they are true, don't do a good job of supporting the conclusion. It's that relationship that you want to weaken, not the facts given in the premises.

[bstampfl]

Thank you Adam! I will focus on the conclusion in Strengthen and Weaken questions and only consider ACs that strengthen/weaken premises IF I don't see any ACs that strengthen/weaken the conclusion.