Joshua Smith's new novel was criticized by the book editor for The Daily Standard as implausible. That criticism, lik...
ca_teran1@yahoo.comNovember 17, 2019
Choice D
I picked choice D but I was lucky. I see the argument criticizing the hero in an incident. Then argument says it could have happened to any other. I think I chose D because of that one incident and taken it to criticize over the book--I hope I make sense. I don't know.
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
This question is asking you to find the "most serious" error of reasoning in the argument. The best way to start on any logical reasoning question is to break down the argument into its component parts. Here we have:
Premise: Smith's novel was criticized by the editor as implausible. Premise: Each incident in Smith's book is the type that could have occurred. Conclusion: That criticism is unwarranted.
Then, try to see if you can spot a flaw in the argument without turning to the answer choices. It's tricky in this case to do so. But, there is one flaw I see and that is that the two premises are talking about two different things. Premise 1 talks about Smith's novel, but Premise 2 talks about the incidents in Smith's novel. These are two different subjects. From your question, it seems you spotted this same issue.
Answer Choices: (A) is incorrect. While the argument mentions the editor's past criticisms, it does not use this to dismiss his criticism. Rather, the focus of the argument is on the plausibility of the incidents in the novel. The argument therefore doesn't rely on this assumption.
(B) is incorrect. The argument does not talk about people agreeing with one another.
(C) is incorrect. This answer choice is a more extreme version of answer choice A. The argument does not talk about the editor's intellectual integrity.
(D) is correct. This answer choice describes the flaw you spotted. Premise 1 is focused on the novel, while premise 2 is focused on the parts of the novel. The conclusion assumes these are the same thing, and that's a flaw in the argument.
(E) is incorrect. I'm honestly not entirely sure what this answer choice is getting at. But, there doesn't seem to be a need to convince yourself of the conclusion to find the premises plausible.
