Can someone analyze the question?

maronghong

Maas is, at best, able to write magazine articles of average quality. The most compelling pieces of evidence for this are those of the numberous articles submitted by Maas that are superior, since Maas, who is incapable of writing an article that is better than average, must obviously have plagiarized superior ones.
The argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds?
A).It simply ignores the existence of potential counterevidence.
B). It generalizes from atypical occurrences.
C). It presupposes what it seeks to establish.
D). It relies on the judgmwent of experts in a matter to which their expertise is irrelevant.
E). It infers limits on ability from a few isolated laspes in performance.

maronghong

I don't know why a is eliminated.

mindfree

Why A is right? I could not see how the argument ignore the "existence" counter evidence. If A is right, counter evidence must "exist". But where is it?

The problem in this question is circular reasoning. M is average, because he submitted above-average stuff, which, because of his average level, must be plagarized. So M is average, which is the conclusion of the argument, is used as a premise to prove the premise. So C

nikema

So great! Appreciate your answer!