Q15 - Kim: In northern Europe during

[wj097]

Hello,

I usually fall into trap answers like A and B, and would like some confirmation on why they are terrible answers. Here's my take

For (A), no "source" is mentioned by Lee; no "additional data" offered, merely a hypothesis; there's nothing that "cannot be reconciled" (<= I interpreted this as contradictory/inconsistent), rather seem to be consistent/relevant with facts Kim cites as those are just background info of 18th eu

For (B), its not "alternative explanation", but a hypothesis; there's no "evidence" cited in Kim's statement, as only explanation of phenomena without evidence i.e., hypothesis is given.

Thx.

[noah]

Good endeavor (nailing down why wrong answers are really wrong). For (B), I'd say there is some evidence given by Kim: the less somber death rites and the lighter philosophies. Otherwise, I agree with you write-up. Here's mine:

In this question we have to pick the answer that best describes how Lee criticizes Kim's argument. Let's start with Kim's argument:

The changes in 18th century northern Europe were the result of an increase in life expectancy around that time. The evidence is the changes themselves (and here, the term "evidence" is a bit awkward): death rites became less serious (paraphrasing here!) and philosophers became more upbeat.

Lee then says that the explanation is probably not correct because people would have had to know that they were likely to live longer.

Remember, our job here is not to criticize Lee or Kim's argument. Instead, let's focus on what Lee is doing. He (she?) is pointing out something that would have to be true for Kim's argument to hold water. That sure sounds like an assumption to me! And, indeed, (D) is correct.

(A) is easily eliminated since there is no additional data mentioned.

(B) is similar to (A) in that it refers to something that isn't in Lee's criticism, namely "alternative explanation".

(C) analogous case? Hunh?

(E) is similar to (A) and (B): where are Kim's two hypotheses? Nowheresville.

[cyt5015]

I understand that Kim has made the assumption that people are aware that their life expectancy had increased. However, Why that assumption is questionable?

Thank you.

[tommywallach]

Hey Cyt,

Your question worries me, because it implies that you don't understand the definition of assumption. An assumption is, (again, by definition), something that is inherently unjustified. If it's PROVEN, it's not an assumption. If it's UNPROVEN, it is an assumption.

Make sense?

-t

[cyt5015]

I see. so by definition all assumptions are questionable, correct? Thank you for clarification!

[tommywallach]

Exactly right! Glad to help! : )