Q23 - Although Finalism...

[Shiggins]

When taking this test I chose A but after reviewing I see how C is on par with the flawed reasoning in the stimulus.

I have a question of how A is wrong.

It states " Evidence on which the claim is based can be shown to be false by manuscript dating techniques, but these dating results have not been cited before."

Is it bc the sentence "but these dating results have not been cited before." Is not really a "misunderstanding"

I feel in choice C: the line "but he is confused" resembles a problem with his critique.

I feel that I am forcing this upon myself as the reasoning. If someone could help, much appreciated.

[tamwaiman]

Argument: There is a belief with an objectionable evidence; since this objection is weak, the belief is clearly true.

(A) There is a belief with an objectionable evidence; since this objection is strong, the belief is likely wrong.

[maryadkins]

The argument is: the attack on finalism is based on a misunderstanding of it (i.e. bad evidence). Therefore, finalism is more plausible than people think.

The flaw is: just because a claim is based on bad evidence doesn't make the opposite more likely to be true. (Suppose I say, "You only think my apartment is dirty because you think you see dirt. But you don't, that's just a speckled floor. So my apartment is cleaner than you thought." That's not necessarily true. My apartment could still be quite dirty; just because the reason you had was bad doesn't make the conclusion impossible or even less likely.

(C) reflects the reasoning and illustrates the same flaw. The engineer has a faulty reason for arguing that aluminum is not as good as titanium, but that doesn't mean his conclusion is now less credible. Also, his being "confused" matches the "misunderstanding" in the stimulus.

As for the other answer choices:

(A) Check out the conclusion"”"it is quite likely that..." This is different from the conclusion in both the stimulus and in (C), both of which say the rejected theory is actually better than people currently believe.

(B) offers a description of people who disagree with a generally accepted theory"”not people who affirm it. It also doesn’t offer a conclusion that a theory is better than currently believed to be.

(D) likely doesn’t offer a conclusion that a theory is better than currently believed to be based on the reason that someone’s critique is ill-founded.

(E) like (A) offers a mismatched conclusion ("it is quite likely that" as opposed to "more likely"), and the flaw is not that the evidence is bad or based on misunderstanding but that the researchers just didn't consider something.

[sge4]

I thought the real problem with (A) was that the speaker is not basing the conclusion on a misunderstanding but instead on a process that just isn't applied (manuscript dating techniques), which would disprove the single author idea. "It is quite likely that a single author did write every word..." seems to clearly favor one side over the other, much as the stimulus and (C) do. Is that inaccurate?

[WaltGrace1983]

I thought the real problem with (A) was that the speaker is not basing the conclusion on a misunderstanding but instead on a process that just isn't applied (manuscript dating techniques), which would disprove the single author idea. "It is quite likely that a single author did write every word..." seems to clearly favor one side over the other, much as the stimulus and (C) do. Is that inaccurate?

I agree. I knocked off (A) because it was basing its (opposing) conclusion on the lack of any real tangible evidence ("these dating results have not been cited"), not the lack of any really well-informed evidence.

[seychelles1718]

I agree with all the explanations above for why A is wrong...so is A wrong for several different reasons? Not just because of the conclusion mismatch?

[maryadkins]

Good point! Yes, there are a couple of ways to get rid of (A). Well done, team.