#10 - Letter to the editor: I was shocked to learn that Judge

[blade21cn]

I chose (A), but the correct answer is (C).

The SuperPrep's rationale for (A) is that even though the reasoning relies on a questionable inference from "(1) what might be called a responsibility of private citizens (to be fair when playing cards)" to "(2) a duty specific to a certain legal professional," there is no indication that it confuses the two. But the letter's writer uses (1) as a premise to make a conclusion about (2). Wouldn't that be evidence that he "confuses" those two - i.e., responsibility in the private life arena v. professional responsibility?

I eliminated (C) because I do not think that this is a sampling issue, since they are not analogous situations. A sampling issue to me is using what the judge did on a few cases to draw a conclusion on how he performs overall professionally.

Thanks!

[Robert Carroll]

blade21cn,

What is the duty, though? The duty to be fair? There's no flaw there - he's fair in one way, so he'll be fair in another way. That's why answer choice (A) is not the flaw, and there is no confusion of different duties and responsibilities. Instead, the problem with the argument is that someone who is fair in one aspect of life might not be fair in others. And that's what answer choice (C) is getting at. "Sampling" doesn't have to be anything very formal - thinking that outcome X will occur all the time because it's occurred one time or a few times involves a sampling issue. Also, the situations are analogous - it's fairness and fairness! They might not be analogous enough for the argument to work...but then, there's no answer choice that talks about that. So that's not a fruitful thing to pursue.

"He'll be fair on the bench - he's fair in my card game" is taking his fairness in one respect to be reflective of a more general fairness. That's an overgeneralization, and answer choice (C) is correct.

Robert Carroll