Q20 - The Public Square was an Important Tool...

[mshinners]

Question Type:
Necessary Assumption

Stimulus Breakdown:
The public square used to be an important tool of democracy because it provided a forum for citizens to discuss important issues. Today, the internet plays the role of the public square.

Therefore, keep the 'net (at least as) free (as the public square)!

Answer Anticipation:
There are two gaps I can see here:
1) The conclusion brings up the new idea of "at least as much freedom". It might be possible to still serve the important function without the same level of freedom.
2) The Internet can serve the same role as the public square, but it might not be the only thing that can. Maybe the Internet can be regulated because there's another forum that already serves this function.

Correct answer:
(C)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Degree. The argument never talks about having "complete" freedom. Additionally, it wouldn't make much sense for the conclusion to state that at least as much as complete freedom of expression is needed.

(B) Degree. The argument doesn't require all citizens to have the same level of freedom. It's possible the Internet could serve this role with citizens all having a baseline level of freedom, but with some having more freedom than others.

(C) This answer choice relates freedom to effectiveness, which is within the scope of the argument. Negating a conditional is difficult, but it involves negating the arrow - the negation here is: Participants lacking the ability to discuss issues freely doesn't necessarily impact the effectiveness of a tool. If this is true, then freedom doesn't have to be assured in order for this tool to work, and the argument falls apart. This answer probably wouldn't be a first-round pick, but since it's in-scope, I'd negate it and see it's the correct answer.

(D) Unnecessary comparison. As long as it's used to discuss important issues, it doesn't matter to the argument if that's only a minority of the discussion. So keep those cat pictures coming.

(E) Tempting! This is related to the second noted gap. However, it is too strong to be necessary. The argument doesn't require that the Internet is the only tool for democracy. There could be others that are much, much less effective and so the Internet should be left free.

Takeaway/Pattern:
In a Necessary Assumption question, leave and negate any answer that's at least within scope and doesn't have a degree issue.

#officialexplanation

[ashca]

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?

E. Other than the Internet, no other public forum today is an important tool of democracy.

I don't understand why this assumption is required for the argument to work.

[smithcarston]

(E) isn't the right answer choice. It's (C)

[kyuya]

Argument breakdown:

- public square used to be an important tool of democracy..Why?. Allowed citizens to discuss important issues.
- internet plays a similar role today.

Therefore

- We should ensure internet users have at least as much freedom of expression as did people speaking in the public square.

What is being assumed here? Its being assumed that to be an important tool of democracy requires a certain level of freedom of expression.

In other words, for the internet to remain an important tool of democracy like its predecessor the public square, it must allow the people using the internet at least equal levels of freedom of expression. We need to then find an answer choice that says something like "freedom of expression does not effect how well a tool of democracy works". Show that it is NOT a requirement for the internet to parallel the town square in that respect, and the argument falls apart!

(A) This is not required. COMPLETE is too strong of a word. It is consistent with the argument that they had little freedom of expression - but the author wants this same amount of freedom of expression to be given to internet users.

(B) Not required. The argument only states that there is a considerable internet community. This does not mean everyone must have the exact same access to the internet. Furthermore, people can have differing levels of access to the internet and yet still use the internet, being sufficient to meet the condition of "internet user".

(C) This is correct, I'll come back to it though.

(D) This is not required for the argument. To negate this, lets say the internet is more often used to discuss cat pictures and baby seals than who is the next president. Does this make the authors argument that because citizens "CAN discuss important issues" that they must be doing so a majority of the time? No! Even if it is a small subsection of that community discussing important issues, it is true that the author believes that these people should be given at least as much freedom as the towns people were. It is also consistent with the idea of the people in the public square mostly talking about frivolous things, but does not preclude the town square from being an important tool.

(E) There could be many public forums that are important. This claim is never made and not required. Even if there are many public forums that are important tools of democracy, the author wanting at least as much freedom for internet users and towns square people still stands strongly.

Okay, so back to (C).

I'll negate this.

If a public forum CANNOT lose effectiveness as a tool if participants cannot discuss issues freely, what does this mean? This means that the effectiveness of a public forum is separate from the degree to which citizens can freely discuss an issue. But wait, the author of this argument is claiming that we need a certain level of freedom of expression for the internet to remain an important and effective tool of democracy, remember? So this answer choice basically says, even if you give the internet users a given level of freedom of expression -- it won't matter --- it doesn't influence how effective of a tool it is for democracy and spreading important ideas. Thats the whole argument though, and if this is indeed true, the argument falls apart. Here is our right answer.

[magic.imango]

Question Type:
Necessary Assumption


(C) This answer choice relates freedom to effectiveness, which is within the scope of the argument. Negating a conditional is difficult, but it involves negating the arrow - the negation here is: Participants lacking the ability to discuss issues freely doesn't necessarily impact the effectiveness of a tool. If this is true, then freedom doesn't have to be assured in order for this tool to work, and the argument falls apart. This answer probably wouldn't be a first-round pick, but since it's in-scope, I'd negate it and see it's the correct answer.


#officialexplanation

If X --> Y, then is the negation X --> ~Y? I wasn't sure by what you meant by "negating the arrow" and I want to make sure I understand how to negate a conditional. Thank you for this great explanation!