Politician: Homelessness is a serious social problem, but further government spending to provide low income housing ...
ShirnelJanuary 25, 2020
Answer choices / Roles in an argument
These answer choices confused me and thus it was hard to understand the role the statement made in the argument. I'm going based on the four roles Mehran mentioned in the video which are:
General Principle
Premise
Intermediate / Subsidiary conclusion
Main conclusion
I was able to identify the main and subsidiary conclusions as well as the sentences. I determined that the statement "Homelessness is a serious problem" was a general principle, however with the answer choices that were given I just couldn't understand the role the question was asking for and thus can't understand why C was the answer choice.
Can you please explain why C is the correct answer choice in terms of the four roles mentioned above?
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
I often found these questions confusing when I was studying too because the answer choices are abstract. It definitely helps to have a full understanding of the argument that the passage is making prior to addressing the question stem and answer choices which it seems like you do! Keep up the good work in that regard!
For this question, we are looking for the way that the general principle that "homelessness is a serious social problem" fits into the broader argument.
(A) is incorrect because recognizing that homelessness is a serious social problem is not an alternative to the author's perspective that government spending will not cure homelessness.
(B) is tempting, but the argument does not seek to resolve the problem of homelessness. It is merely concluding that one suggested solution for homelessness will not be effective.
(D) is incorrect because the author is not attempting to discredit homelessness as a serious social problem. They are simply arguing against one proposed cure for said social problem.
(E) is incorrect because this statement is not a premise, but a general principle. The argument could be drawn just as effectively if the principle were not included:
Premise: There is no lack of available housing units.
Subsidiary Conclusion: It is incorrect to say that people are homeless because of a lack of housing.
Conclusion: Therefore, further government spending on housing is not the cure for homelessness.
(C) is the correct answer because you can agree that homelessness is a serious social problem regardless of whether you accept the conclusion or not.
Accepting Conclusion: Homelessness is a serious social problem, but government funding is not the way to solve it.
Denying Conclusion: If we are to solve the serious social problem of homelessness, we need additional government funding for housing.
Hope this is helpful! Keep up the good work and please let us know if you have any further questions!
ShirnelJanuary 27, 2020
Thank you very much, that certainly was very thorough. I think that I took the roles literally hence why I was just confused by the answer choices, I expected to see "general principle" in the answer choice, none the less a general principle can either support, oppose or have no effect on the conclusion. And in this case answer choice, C says just that. Am I thinking of this in the correct way now?
VictoriaFebruary 1, 2020
Hi @Shirnel,
So happy to hear that the explanation was helpful!
You are absolutely correct in the way you've laid this out.
Keep up the great work and please reach out if you have any further questions!
DalaalFebruary 20, 2020
Question relating to this explanation: I had not previously comprehended that general principles are not premises. If I am not mistake, I remember in the Main Point question type lesson, the instructor mentioned something about premises being either facts, general rules or principles, or subsidiary conclusions. I realize in this question per se the general principle that homelessness is a serious social problem does not necessarily affect the conclusion, but is this a general rule? How do I differentiate the various roles which a general principle can play in an argument? I ask because I encountered questions where the generalization was the conclusion. So it seems that such statements can play various roles in an argument.
