- Thu Aug 08, 2019 4:51 pm
#67161
Hi lanereuden,
I'm happy to discuss this question, but the more detail you can give us about why you went a certain direction, or what specific problems you had, the more we can tailor the answer to your personal issues.
This stimulus discusses generocity. The columnist argues that donating to charity may be generous, but the generosity it shows is not permanent virtue because the donations are made only intermittently.
The question asks us for the flaw in the reasoning. This question type asks us to describe what is wrong in the argument.
What's wrong with that stimulus? Do we know what it means to have a permanent virtue? Why would we assume frequency of donations is the only way to determine generosity. That's a big assumption. The stimulus starts by saying that generocity may be A sign of generosity, but that's different than suggesting it's the only way we judge generocity. If we are relying on the fact that donations are only made intermittently to show that virtue is only intermittent, we are assuming there is no other way to demonstrate generosity. It also assumes that donations have to be constantly occurring at a certain (undefined) frequency for a person to be generous. Can you be generous even when you aren't actively donating? Sure--think of the most generous person you can. Are they donating every second of every day? Are they still generous during those times they aren't donating? That would suggest that you can have a character trait even when you aren't engaging in a specific activity showing that trait.
Let's look at the answer choices:
Answer choice (A): This says that it assumes generous people are the most virtuous. But the argument does nothing to talk about comparative virtue at all. We can eliminate this as irrelevant.
Answer choice (B): This is describing an argument that attacks people and not positions. But we know nothing about the character of people who have different positions from the columnist.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer. This describes the error we found above. It assumes that the only way of showing generosity is through donations in that moment. But as described more fully above, you can have a character trait without constantly manifesting it.
Answer choice (D): The answer is saying that the columnist relies on too small of a sample size. But we have no idea what sample size he used. He could be considering every doner in the US. Sample is not an issue here.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice says that the columnists assume that most people donate out of generosity. But all the columnist states is that donations may be a sign of generosity, not that most donations are out of generosity.
Hope that helps!
Rachael
