Ph.D. programs are valuable only if they inculcate good scholarship and expedite the student's full participation in ...

Ravi December 14, 2018

Hi @kadipin25,

I'm happy to help break this down for you. The first task is for us to break down the stimulus.

Conclusion: Doctoral dissertations should not be required in the humanities

Evidence/Premises: Ph.D. programs are valuable only if they inculcate good scholarship and expedite the student's full participation in the field. However, writing long dissertations is impractical for someone new to their discipline, as this person will likely respond with poor quality work or taking extremely long to finish the program. Either way, the dissertation is counterproductive to the goals of the doctoral program.

The question asks us to identify the role that the claim that doctoral dissertations should not be required in the humanities plays in the argument.

Since we've identified this claim as the conclusion, we're looking for an answer choice that states that this particular claim is the conclusion of the argument. Answer choice (C) is this answer. While it doesn't say the word "conclusion." its words are a paraphrasing of what the word "conclusion" means. Answer (C) says, "It is what the argument is attempting to establish," and that is precisely what a conclusion is.

kadipin25 December 16, 2018

Ok thank you

Ravi December 16, 2018

@kadipin25 happy to help!

jack-marie February 8, 2019

why not E?

Ravi February 8, 2019

@jack-marie,

(E) says, "It confirms the observation that the requirement for a
dissertation can frustrate the goals of a doctoral program."

Keep in mind we're looking at the role that the claim that "doctoral
dissertations should not be required in the humanities" plays into the
argument.

The claim has "should" in it, and arguing that doctoral dissertations
should not be required in the humanities can't confirm an observation.
While it could reasonably be a conclusion that follows from
observation, it certainly can't confirm an observation.

Plus, (E) makes no mention of the phrase being the main conclusion,
and as our analysis shows, "doctoral dissertations should not be
required in the humanities" is the main point of the argument. Thus,
we can safely get rid of (E).

Does that make sense? Let us know if you have any other questions!

Audrey-Swope August 20, 2019

Is there anyway to further break down argument structure? I am still struggling to distinguish premise and conclusion.