/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 20 Graphologists claim that it is p... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Log out

Learning Materials

Features

Discover

Chapter 4: Problem 20

Graphologists claim that it is possible to detect permanent character traits by examining people's handwriting. For example, a strong cross on the " \(t\) " is supposed to denote enthusiasm. Obviously, however, with practice and perseverance people can alter their handwriting to include this feature. So it seems that graphologists must hold that permanent character traits can be changed. The argument against graphology proceeds by (A) citing apparently incontestable evidence that leads to absurd consequences when conjoined with the view in question (B) demonstrating that an apparently controversial and interesting claim is really just a platitude (C) arguing that a particular technique of analysis can never be effective when the people analyzed know that it is being used (D) showing that proponents of the view have no theoretical justification for the view (E) attacking a technique by arguing that what the technique is supposed to detect can be detected quite readily without it

Short Answer

Expert verified
Choice (A) is correct, as it uses evidence to show an absurd contradiction.

Step by step solution

01

Analyze the Argument's Claim

The argument claims that if handwriting can indicate permanent traits (as graphologists suggest), but people can change their handwriting, then these permanent traits must be changeable. However, permanent traits by definition should not change, creating a contradiction.
02

Identify the Form of Reasoning

The argument is designed to show a contradiction or absurdity. It takes the belief that handwriting reveals permanent traits and points out that if people can change their handwriting to show a different trait, then the trait is not truly permanent.
03

Analyze the Choices

Let's consider each option to understand which best portrays the argument's reasoning: - **(A)** implies citing evidence that leads to absurd conclusions, which aligns with our analysis of pointing out contradictions. - **(B)** discusses a claim as a platitude, which doesn't fit the argument's structure. - **(C)** suggests effectiveness when subjects are aware, but the argument focuses on contradictions, not effectiveness. - **(D)** involves lacking theoretical justification, but the argument doesn't attack theoretical foundations. - **(E)** argues the technique's redundancy, while the argument is about contradiction, not redundancy.
04

Select the Best Matching Choice

Option (A) reflects the reasoning of pointing out that if graphologists' claim about permanent traits were true, then it would lead to the absurdity that permanent traits must be changeable. This is directly aligned with demonstrating absurd consequences by using the graphologists' own claims.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91影视!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Argument Analysis
When analyzing an argument, the goal is to understand the premises and conclusions, along with the logical structure used to connect them. In the context of graphology, the argument makes a bold claim: that permanent character traits can be detected from handwriting. However, it challenges this claim by introducing the idea that people can change their handwriting.
This challenge creates a premise that leads to a contradiction, suggesting that if handwriting indicates permanent traits yet can be altered at will, then these traits aren't truly permanent. It's essential to break down arguments into these components:
  • Premise: Handwriting can reveal permanent traits.
  • Contradictory Premise: Handwriting can be altered.
  • Conclusion: Permanent traits can be changed, which is a contradiction.
This method of analyzing involves identifying contradictions with the original claim, leading to a logical conclusion that undermines the claim itself. Such scrutiny is fundamental in evaluating the soundness of arguments, especially those involving unconventional methods like graphology.
Contradiction in Reasoning
A contradiction arises in reasoning when an argument contains statements that cannot simultaneously be true. In the graphology argument, we identify a contradiction by focusing on the term 'permanent traits.'
If graphologists argue that handwriting reveals these immutable traits, yet acknowledge people can change their handwriting, they inadvertently claim that permanent traits are mutable. This directly contradicts the basic definition of a permanent trait.
The reasoning involves observing:
  • Graphology's claim of permanence.
  • Human ability to alter handwriting consciously.
  • The resulting logical inconsistency.
Recognizing such contradictions weakens the argument and highlights the importance of internal consistency. Logical reasoning thrives on clarity and consistency; any contradiction calls for revisiting and reassessing the premises to ensure they genuinely support the conclusion.
Graphology Critique
Graphology, or the analysis of handwriting as a window into personality traits, faces significant scrutiny due to its underlying assumptions. Critiques often focus on the lack of empirical evidence supporting graphology's claims. The exercise examines the claim that handwriting permanently reflects character traits but reveals a flaw by showing these traits as changeable.
Critics argue:
  • Lack of scientific basis: Graphology doesn't consistently predict personality since handwriting can change based on various factors.
  • Subjectivity in interpretation: Often, graphologists' analyses rely on subjective opinions rather than measurable criteria.
  • Alternative explanations: Characteristics attributed to graphology can be better explained by psychological methods and personality tests.
The critique extends to addressing the redundancy of graphology given the capacity of individuals to alter their handwriting consciously. This examination leads to questioning its validity as a reliable technique, underscoring the need for critical thinking when evaluating pseudo-scientific claims.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Of all the surgeons practicing at the city hospital, the chief surgeon has the worst record in terms of the percentage of his patients who die either during or immediately following an operation performed by him. Paradoxically, the hospital's administrators claim that he is the best surgeon currently working at the hospital. Which one of the following, if true, goes farthest toward showing that the administrators' claim and the statistic cited might both be correct? (A) Since the hospital administrators appoint the chief surgeon, the administrators are strongly motivated to depict the chief surgeon they have chosen as a wise choice. (B) In appointing the current chief surgeon, the hospital administrators followed the practice, well established at the city hospital, of promoting one of the surgeons already on staff. (C) Some of the younger surgeons on the city hospital's staff received part of their training from the current chief surgeon. (D) At the city hospital those operations that inherently entail the greatest risk to the life of the patient are generally performed by the chief surgeon. (E) The current chief surgeon has a better record of patients' surviving surgery than did his immediate predecessor.

For the writers who first gave feudalism its name, the existence of feudalism presupposed the existence of a noble class. Yet there cannot be a noble class, properly speaking, unless both the titles that indicate superior, noble status and the inheritance of such titles are sanctioned by law. Although feudalism existed in Europe as early as the eighth century, it was not until the twelfth century, when many feudal institutions were in decline, that the hereditary transfer of legally recognized titles of nobility first appeared. The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following claims? (A) To say that feudalism by definition requires the existence of a nobility is to employ a definition that distorts history. (B) Prior to the twelfth century, the institution of European feudalism functioned without the presence of a dominant class. (C) The fact that a societal group has a distinct legal status is not in itself sufficient to allow that group to be properly considered a social class. (D) The decline of feudalism in Europe was the only cause of the rise of a European nobility. (E) The prior existence of feudal institutions is a prerequisite for the emergence of a nobility, as defined in the strictest sense of the term.

Comets do not give off their own light but reflect light from other sources, such as the Sun. Scientists estimate the mass of comets by their brightness: the greater a comet's mass, the more light that comet will reflect. A satellite probe, however, has revealed that the material of which Halley's comet is composed reflects 60 times less light per unit of mass than had been previously thought. The statements above, if true, give the most support to which one of the following? (A) Some comets are composed of material that reflects 60 times more light per unit of mass than the material of which Halley's comet is composed. (B) Previous estimates of the mass of Halley's comet which were based on its brightness were too low. (C) The total amount of light reflected from Halley's comet is less than scientists had previously thought. (D) The reflective properties of the material of which comets are composed vary considerably from comet to comet. (E) Scientists need more information before they can make a good estimate of the mass of Halley's comet.

No mathematician today would flatly refuse to accept the results of an enormous computation as an adequate demonstration of the truth of a theorem. In 1976 , however, this was not the case. Some mathematicians at that time refused to accept the results of a complex computer demonstration of a very simple mapping theorem. Although some mathematicians still hold a strong belief that a simple theorem ought to have a short, simple proof, in fact, some simple theorems have required enormous proofs. If all of the statements in the passage are true, which one of the following must also be true? (A) Today, some mathematicians who believe that a simple theorem ought to have a simple proof would consider accepting the results of an enormous computation as a demonstration of the truth of a theorem. (B) Some individuals who believe that a simple theorem ought to have a simple proof are not mathematicians. (C) Today, some individuals who refuse to accept the results of an enormous computation as a demonstration of the truth of a theorem believe that a simple theorem ought to have a simple proof. (D) Some individuals who do not believe that a simple theorem ought to have a simple proof would not be willing to accept the results of an enormous computation as proof of a complex theorem. (E) Some nonmathematicians do not believe that a simple theorem ought to have a simple proof.

There is a widespread belief that people can predict impending earthquakes from unusual animal behavior. Skeptics claim that this belief is based on selective coincidence: people whose dogs behaved oddly just before an earthquake will be especially likely to remember that fact. At any given time, the skeptics say, some of the world's doss will be behaving oddly. Clarification of which one of the following issues would be most important to an evaluation of the skeptics' position? (A) Which is larger, the number of skeptics or the number of people who believe that animal behavior can foreshadow earthquakes? (B) Are there means other than the observation of animal behavior that nonscientists can use to predict earthquakes? (C) Are there animals about whose behavior people know too little to be able to distinguish unusual from everyday behavior? (D) Are the sorts of behavior supposedly predictive of earthquakes as pronounced in dogs as they are in other animals? (E) Is the animal behavior supposedly predictive of earthquakes specific to impending earthquakes or can it be any kind of unusual behavior?
See all solutions

Recommended explanations on English Textbooks

Cues and Conventions

Read Explanation

Email

Read Explanation

Multiple Choice Questions

Read Explanation

English Grammar Summary

Read Explanation

Blog

Read Explanation

Lexis and Semantics Summary

Read Explanation
View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.