1) Whittaker: There can be no such thing as the number of medical school students who drop out before their second year, because if they drop out, they never have a second year. Hudson: By your reasoning I cannot help but become rich, because there is similarly no such thing as my dying before my first million dollars is in the bank.
Hudson responds to Whittaker by
(A) showing that a relevantly analogous argument leads to an untenable conclusion (A) (B) citing a specific example to counter Whittaker’s general claim (C) pointing out that Whittaker mistakes a necessary situation for a possible situation (D) claiming that what Whittaker says cannot be true because Whittaker acts as if it were false (E) showing that Whittaker’s argument relies on analyzing an extreme and unrepresentative case
Whittaker's reasoning is as follows: Premise: If people do A before having B; then they do not have B. (A = drop out; B = second year.) Conclusion: No people do A before having B.
Hudson's similar reasoning: Premise (not shown): If people die before having a million dollars in the bank, then they do not have a million dollars in the bank. (A = die; B = a million dollars in the bank.) Conclusion (shown): No people die before having a millon dollars in the bank.
But we know that most people die before becoming a millionair. So Hudson just used an analogy of Whittaker's logic to show the absurdity of the resulting conclusion in an attempt to refute the latter's logic.
sdcar2010, would u plz kindly explain question 1 for me? i can't understand what the stimulus means thanks so much!
In the main conlcusion: "since there are many people who have colds but do not use the mixture, it is obviously not effective"; there are many people who have colds but do not use the mixture is NOT a necessary condition, but a sufficient condition.
In all reasonings, ONLY a sufficient condtion can correctly lead to the resulting conclusion, but not vice versa. And the cold suffer did not indicate what is the necessary condition for his conclusion to follow.
hello SDCAR2010 for Q2: 2) Some people have been promoting a new herbal mixture as a remedy for the common cold. The mixture contains, among other things, extracts of the plants purple cone-flower and goldenseal. A cold sufferer, skeptical of the claim that the mixture is an effective cold remedy, argued, “Suppose that the mixture were an effective cold remedy. Since most people with colds wish to recover quickly, it follows that almost everybody with a cold would be using it. Therefore, since there are many people who have colds but do not use the mixture, it is obviously not effective.”
Which one of the following most accurately describes the method of reasoning the cold sufferer uses to reach the conclusion of the argument?
(A) finding a claim to be false on the grounds that it would, if true, have consequences that are false (B) accepting a claim on the basis of public opinion of the claim (C) showing that conditions necessary to establish the truth of a claim are met (D) basing a generalization on a representative group of instances (E) showing that a measure claimed to be effective in achieving a certain effect would actually make achieving the effect more difficult
Although I knew that (a) is the correct answer (c) puzzles me for I think that there are many people who have colds but do not use the mixture is necessary for the conclusion that it is not effective and I can't understand what the are met means at the end of (C), look forward to your reply.
Dear SDCAR2010, I'm not good at analyzing the "sufficient and necessary" questions. Would you please give some more illustrations, or state it with an example?
Sufficient and necessary are mostly used in assumption questions and formal logic questions. You can read my posts on these two subjects and, hopefully get a better understanding.
Sufficient and necessary are mostly used in assumption questions and formal logic questions. You can read my posts on these two subjects and, hopefully get a better understanding.
sufficient = enabling; necessary = required.
-- by 会员 sdcar2010 (2011/10/3 22:32:44)
Yes, when I ask the question, I haven't read your post No.8. Now I know it more clearly with your help. Thanks a lot! Regards!
还有个问题 第二题 牛牛说 Conclusion: The mixture is obviously not effective Premise： Suppose that the mixture were an effective cold remedy
premise 要support conclusion 但是我在这里看不出来这个premise support了conclusion啊？ 我认为 Therefore, since there are many people who have colds but do not use the mixture 才是support了 conclusion啊 这句话能看做是premise么？
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
楼主
发表于 2011-10-3 21:59:56
