Q2 - An information design expert

[lrellis22]

Can someone please breakdown question 2 and explain why answer choice (D): fails to consider that a tool might not effectively perform its intended function is correct? Thank you!!

[ohthatpatrick]

Thanks for bringing this question to the Forum!

Question Type: Flaw

Correct answer: D

Argument core:
GIAPS is just a tool
thus
it can't be blamed for bad presentations
thus
bad presentations must be blamed on users who use the tool poorly

This argument does contain a subsidiary conclusion, so we're allowed to fight the author's logic in drawing either of the last two conclusions.

I tend to approach Flaw questions by immediately assuming the OPPOSITE point of view of the author, to see if I can figure out how to make a counterargument.

He thinks that if something is just a tool, it can't be blamed for poor output.

Really?

I write/record music all the time. Instruments are some of my tools. If a guitar has bad intonation, there's no way to tune it so that the whole fretboard plays in tune. Out of tune guitar playing could lead to a bad recording. I think I could fairly blame the tool in that circumstance. Even if I use the guitar properly (i.e. play the part perfectly), it will still produce inferior output.

Can you think of any examples in which the TOOL, not the user, would be to blame?

Let's look at some answer choices.

(A) This says that the author contradicted herself. ("inconsistent" = contradictory) Hmm, where? I don't see any contradictory ideas. The author's argument is everything following the "But". None of those ideas contradict each other. Eliminate.

(B) This says that the author assumed that EVERY single effective presentation is a good one. Say what? Where did the author assume that? The author's only assumption was "if something is just a tool, then it cannot be blamed for bad output".

(C) This answer seems to be attacking the 'information design expert'. Our author's argument is everything following the "But", and there is no mention of popularity there at all.

(D) This answer attacks the author's assumption that "if something is just a tool, then it cannot be blamed for bad output". It's saying, "Yes it can." After all, the user might use a tool with proper intent (such as my example of playing a guitar part perfectly) but the tool might not perform its job properly (the guitar might still sound out of tune) Think about the author's last sentence: "the responsibility must lie with those who use the tool poorly" Well (D) seems to present an alternative possibility: the user might use the tool properly, but the tool doesn't perform its intended function. We'd have to blame the tool, not the user in that circumstance.

(E) Nothing in the author's argument (everything following the 'But') attacks the design expert.

Hope this helps. Let me know if it's still not clicking.

[laurenvarg]

How would you classify this flaw? I accurately predicted the answer would be something that shows how else a bad presentation could come about aside from someone using the tool incorrectly, but am wondering how you'd classify.

I ended up going with:
Conditional logic flaw: takes for granted that a sufficient condition is the only condition for a phenomenon (That using a tool incorrectly is the only way a presentation would be bad).

Thoughts?

[ohthatpatrick]

I don't think I would try to classify this one, other than using a generic idea like "missing the assumption that if you're a tool, I can't blame you for bad output"

Just because we have those ten Famous Flaws that show up over and over again doesn't mean that every flaw deserves a name.

(A) is Internal Contradiction
(E) is Ad Hom (attacking the person, not the argument)

The other three answers are just one-off ideas that are specifically about this topic.

You could try to force this into the False Choice category:
Author thinks you either blame the tool or blame the human, when it's seemingly possible to blame both.

[hnadgauda]

I thought the flaw in the stimulus was a term shift--going from presentations that are ineffective to bad. This is what lead me to choose B. I am getting a lot of the flaw questions wrong and can't seem to nail down a strategy for approaching them.

My approach so far is as follows: try to classify the classic flaw in the stimulus and use this to pre-phrase the answer, eliminate wrong answers, and choose what's left. Is there another approach I should be taking?

[andreperez7]

Can you think of any examples in which the TOOL, not the user, would be to blame?

Yes. How about a chef and a broken stove? Say that the stove always heats at full blast, causing everything to get burnt, so regardless of whether you're Gordon Ramsey or can only cook toast, the food is burnt.

Or how about a virus-infected computer that corrupts your emails, regardless of how well you wrote them?

In both cases, although ultimately responsibility for the outcome lies in the user, the tool does hurt the result.

[LawrenceR550]

Spent too much time on this question deciding between A and D. Why A? Well, the argument starts by saying that the tool leads people to develop ineffective presentations. Then it goes on to blame the tool, putting the responsibility on it, rather than the people developing their presentations. This presents an inconsistency. At first I thought the author misinterpretted the expert designer's statement, using it as a premise to arrive at the conclusion. Then I realized that if we assume the author to have properly interpretted the expert designer's statement, we can safely posit that maybe it really was the tool's fault.