#22- Student: The publications of Professor Vallejo on the

[rachue]

I understand why E is correct here but can someone please help me understand why D must be incorrect?

[Dave Killoran]

I wouldn't say that it "mistakes" one for the other. The author states as a premise that "the traditional view is still maintained by the majority of historians," so I wouldn't think that the author has had any confusion there--it is stated as a fact.

Note that, in Flaw questions, the error is normally made when the author moves from the premises to the conclusion. And, in this case, when the author (or "Student") draws his or her conclusion, that's when he or she makes the error described in (E).

Does that make sense? Please let me know. Thanks!

[rachue]

Yes, that does make sense. Thanks!

[Applesaid]

hello!

With this question, I incorrectly picked answer choice B incorrectly because I thought it looks like false dilemma. And I don't see why it mistakes the majority view for the traditional view. It only says that the traditional view is still held by the majority of historians. Even then, what's the problem with it?


Celine

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Celine,

This is a tricky question!

Answer choice (B) doesn't describe a false dilemma. It says that the author presupposes the truth of the Professor's claims. But the author explicitly does not presuppose that the Professor's claims are true. He says "IF Professor Vallejo is correct, we must conclude...." So the author doesn't assume that the Professor's views are correct he just says that if they are correct, we must come to this conclusion.

You're right, the stimulus doesn't mistake a majority view for the traditional view as answer choice (D) states. This answer is incorrect.

The correct answer is answer choice (E), that the argument confuses inadequate evidence for truth with evidence for falsity. This is an evidence error that we can see in the stimulus. The author states that if the Professor is correct, there is insufficient evidence that glassblowing began in Egypt and, therefore, glassblowing must have originated elsewhere. But insufficient evidence to prove something true, doesn't prove it false.

There's no false dilemma here--if glassblowing didn't originate in Egypt, it must have originated somewhere else. Those are completely fair options. We just don't have enough evidence, whether or not we accept the Professor's claims, to prove that glassblowing did not originate in Egypt.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[Sammiewhammie]

Hi,

Is answer E basically saying that since there’s not enough evidence of glassblowing originating in Egypt, then there is evidence of it originating elsewhere (or that the claim it originated in Egypt is false)?

Thanks,
Sam

[Adam Tyson]

Pretty much, Sam! To clarify, though, the author is saying that a lack of evidence that it originated in Egypt IS evidence that it originated elsewhere, which is a classic "lack of evidence" flaw. It's not that there must be some other evidence; it's just "you can't prove it happened here, so it must have happened somewhere else!"

A lack of evidence in favor of a claim cannot be used as proof that the claim is false. A lack of evidence against a claim cannot be used as proof that the claim is true. A lack of evidence proves nothing!