#6 - Every year, news reports appear concerning the health risks

[parytownson]

I recognize that this a flaw question, but my question is whether this stimulus has multiple flaws besides the correct answer. I see that (E) is correct because it is not necessarily the case that one article's claim that coffee is dangerous to one's health and another article's claim that coffee has some benefits of one's health are contradictory statements. For example, coffee may be bad for one's cardiovascular system, but may be good for one's digestive system. In this instance, coffee is both "bad" for one's health and also "good" for one's health.

My prewrite had a different flaw than the correct answer choice. I wrote that the author of the stimulus assumes that the news report articles on coffee were conducted by experts. We do not know that it was experts who wrote these articles. All we know is the news reports are referring to articles about coffee.

Would this be an equally valid flaw with the argument given that the question stem specifically mentions "a" flaw (as opposed to "the" flaw) in the argument?

[Beatrice Brown]

Hi Pary! Thanks for your great question, and great example for how answer choice (E) accurately describes a flaw in the stimulus!

In general, there can be multiple flaws in a stimulus, and the correct answer choice will point out one of these flaws in the argument. That being said, be careful on the prephrase you came up with for this question! The stimulus discusses "new reports," not "news reports." Nothing in the stimulus, then, leads us to believe that the articles were not written by experts since all we know is that they're reports.

I hope this helps, and let me know if you have any other questions!

[parytownson]

In general, there can be multiple flaws in a stimulus, and the correct answer choice will point out one of these flaws in the argument. That being said, be careful on the prephrase you came up with for this question! The stimulus discusses "new reports," not "news reports." Nothing in the stimulus, then, leads us to believe that the articles were not written by experts since all we know is that they're reports.

For all other law school hopefuls reading this post, let my error serve as a perfect example on the importance of reading carefully. Thank you so much, Beatrice, for pointing this out. Yes, if it is the case that these are just new reports, then I see exactly what you mean that I would not be in a position to question the experts.

Thank you very much for clarifying my error!