A LR question

cdprotein · 发表于 2010-5-5 12:07:49

Jane: Professor Harper’s ideas for modifying the design of guitars are of no value because there is no general agreement among musicians as to what a guitar should sound like and, consequently, no widely accepted basis for evaluating the merits of a guitar’s sound.
Mark: What’s more, Harper’s ideas have had enough time to be adopted if they really resulted in superior sound. It took only ten years for the Torres design for guitars to be almost universally adopted because of the improvement it makes in tonal quality.
Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship between Jane’s argument and Mark’s argument?
(A)   Mark’s argument shows how a weakness in Jane’s argument can be overcome.
(B)   Mark’s argument has a premise in common with Jane’s argument.
(C)   Mark and Jane use similar techniques to argue for different conclusions.
(D)   Mark’s argument restates Jane’s argument in other terms.
(E)   Mark’s argument and Jane’s argument are based on conflicting suppositions.

I understand that E is the correct answer choice. But I do not quite understand why C is wrong. Specifically what is the technique that Jane uses to proceed her argument?

Thank you.

dphxmg · 发表于 2010-5-5 16:11:36

Mark invokes a historical precedent, but Jane doesn't.

cdprotein · 发表于 2010-5-6 02:52:24

thank dphxmg for answering my question.

Still I am confused on the following two points:

1. I think your comments about Mark's technique is reasonable. As for the logical technique, it should be analogical induction.

2. I think Jane should be using a certain technique which is different from Mark's, because what she said should be process of reasoning. Can you name this technique?

dphxmg · 发表于 2010-5-6 19:10:55

As to your first question, mark reasons from analogy, but not induction; because he doesn't abstract any general principle from that analogue.

As to Jane's argument, I think it a deduction but somehow a non sequiter. She considers the modifications worthless, yet her major premise is that there is not any widely accepted set standards for judging them. If we accept the premise, it is more logical to say that we cannot judge the modification. Despite the fallacy inflicting her argument, the technique is still deduction.

In fact, the real controversy between Jane and Mark is whether it is appropriate to pass judgment on the modifications immediately. Under this controversy lurks a deeper question whether our aesthetic values can form, change, or disappear over time.

cdprotein · 发表于 2010-5-6 21:56:55

Thank dphxmg very much. Your last point is insightful.

A LR question

所属分类: 法学院申请

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()