To the Editor:In 1960, an astronomer proposed a mathematical model for determining whether extraterrestrial life exis...

Jade April 17, 2021

Should we be disproving the premise or conclusion?

I think I've gotten confused on how to approach this--C made the most sense to me, but it seems to disprove the premise leading to the author's conclusion: "This indicates that the astronomer's model is wrong and life as we know it exists only on the planet Earth."

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Ashley-Tien-2 May 7, 2021

Normally we aren't directly disproving the premise but the argument, or the idea that the conclusion follows the premises. So we know that we have yet to detect life outside planet earth and the author concludes from this that life only exists on earth and not anywhere else. the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises because even if we had yet to detect life outside planet earth, it doesn't necessarily mean there is absolutely no life outside earth. Maybe, as the correct choice states, we just don't have the necessary instruments necessary to detect life outside planet earth. if that were true, then it casts doubt on the conclusion.