All any reporter knows about the accident is what the press agent has said. Therefore, if the press agent told every...
ShirnelMarch 13, 2020
Help with diagramming and understanding flawed reasoning questions
Although this is the same type of question as #36 I didn't understanding the explanation based on the diagramming in the video. Can Sam please respond to this if possible? Thanks.
I diagramed like this:
All any reporter knows about the accident is what the press agent has said.
(This has conditional language but I noticed it wasn't diagrammed in explanation video)
Therefore, if the press agent told every reporter everything about the accident, then no reporter knows any more about it than any other reporter.
PATERE ==> Not R>R
R>R ==> Not PATERE
If no reporter knows any more about the accident than any other reporter, then no reporter can scoop all of the other reporters.
Not R>R ==> Not SAOR
SAOR ==> R>R
However, the press agent did not tell every reporter everything about the accident.
Not PATERE
It follows that some reporter can scoop all of the other reporters.
SAOR
The way that I process a flawed question is I first try to make a valid S&N chain:
PATERE ==> Not R>R==> Not SAOR
Based on this I can see that the flawed structure in the argument is the S&N statement was negated rather than reversed and negated.
I know my response should say something about the necessary condition. However, I get lost from here. Please advise.
P.S. Can Sam please respond to this? Thanks
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Your S & N chain looks good. I might simplify your acronyms just to make it easier on yourself, but that is up to you. The logic is valid.
PATERE - -> not R>R - -> not SAOR
The argument then says, "The press agent did not tell every reporter everything." This negates our sufficient condition, giving us not PATERE.
Does negating a sufficient condition have any effect on a necessary condition? No. Remember that a necessary condition can exist without the sufficient condition. This is how I would describe the flaw in the argument. (I think this is what you meant by negated rather than reversed and negated).The author thinks that negating the sufficient condition negates the necessary condition, resulting in SAOR (can scoop). This is not valid. It is still very possible that no reporter can scoop another.
So, what has the author failed to recognize? Here's my prediction. What if the press agent said nothing? She might not have spoken to reporters at all. What if she told half of the story to all of the reporters? These are both consistent with the passage, but they result in the reporters having the same level of information. This is why E is the correct answer. It comes from understanding that there might be other ways for the reporters to have equal information, and therefore be unable to scoop. This is a tricky question, keep up the good work.
Karen-NorrisMay 5, 2021
This was a very difficult question. I missed it and even after I read the explanation I had to ponder it awhile. I get what Shirnel is saying because the question just prior to this had a conclusion that was (what they call in Powerscore language) a mistaken negation (TM). Where the terms are negated but not flipped. In the previous question it states that when a mistaken negation occurs, we should look for a circumstance in which the necessary can occur without the sufficient having occurred. So know I get it. Because although we are supposed accept the premises as true, in the conclusory sentence where it says the press agent did not tell every reporter everything about the accident, the tendency is to think that he gave the reporters different bits of information; however, it is possible that the reporter did not tell any reporter everything about the accident. In fact he could have given every single reporter the exact same incomplete story. I'm sure you already knew all this, but it helps me to spell it all out again so that hopefully this reiteration will help the lesson stick. PS: Third times a charm right? I took Kaplan, Powerscore, and now I think it's finally starting to sink in. Thank y'all.
Karen-NorrisMay 5, 2021
Correction: "So now I get it." and Thank(s) y'all. : )
