#16 - Editorial: The main contention of Kramer’s book is

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[shw30521]

So i thought it was D and I don't know why... The correct answer is E because the argument is saying that Kramers main conclusion is wrong because he bases his contention on a false fact. An inadequate argument was used as a premise for Kramers conclusion.

[Erik Christensen]

SHW,

The key here is to understand the distinction between the main contention of Kramer's book that coal companies are responsible for the region's economic difficulties and the arguments used to support that contention. The editorialist suggests that the arguments used to support the main contention of the book are inadequate and therefore the contention must be false but the editorialist seems to ignore the possibility that the contention may be true even if Kramer didn't support the contention adequately. That is the flaw in the editorialist's argument as indicated by correct answer choice (e).

In other words, there are different ways you could prove the main contention and the way that Kramer chose to do so in his book was based on the coal workers' assertions related to the lack of other regional investments made by the coal companies. However, regardless of whether that argument is true or false (or adequately supported or not in the book), it is only one possible way of proving the contention, so any answer choice like (d) that bogs us down in the logic of that argument cannot be correct. Let us know if you have any other questions!!

ERIK

[hlee18]

Hello,

I'm trying to understand what D actually means, and what would be an example of that?

[Brook Miscoski]

hlee18,

Answer choice (D) is a reference to conditional reasoning (the references to "sufficient" and "necessary" conditions tell you that). It's wrong because the stimulus isn't based on conditional reasoning.

An answer choice that refers to confusing sufficient conditions with necessary conditions is describing a Mistaken Reversal or a Mistaken Negation.

[hlee18]

Brook, thank you!

[theamazingrace]

Hi, I originally choose C but after reading the reasoning as to why E is correct I would have chosen E. Is C incorrect because Kramer is not the person who previously worked for the coal companies? It is the disgruntled coal company employees that would have ulterior motives.

[Adam Tyson]

You're correct that the disgruntled former employees are the ones who may have an ulterior motive. But answer C is wrong because that ulterior motive, whether Kramer's or the employees', is not why the author rejects the conclusion. The author rejects the conclusion because some of the support for it - the allegation that the companies did not make major investments in other industries - turns out to be false. In short, the argument is "one of your premises is false, therefore your conclusion must be false," and that is not a valid argument. We might call that a "some evidence" flaw, where the author has weakened an opposing position but has acted as if they completely disproved that position.

It doesn't matter whose motives are being considered in answer C, because the author did not base their argument on an attack on those motives!