/*! 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 22 The critic's response to the his... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Log out

Learning Materials

Features

Discover

Chapter 4: Problem 22

The critic's response to the historian is flawed because it (A) produces evidence that is consistent with there not having been any timber trade between Poran and Nayal during the third Nayalese dynasty (B) cites current laws without indicating whether the laws cited are relevant to the timber trade (C) fails to recognize that the historian's conclusion was based on indirect evidence rather than direct evidence (D) takes no account of the difference between a law's enactment at a particular time and a law's existence as part of a legal code at a particular time (E) accepts without question the assumption about the purpose of laws that underlies the historian's argument

Short Answer

Expert verified
The critic's flaw is best described by Option D.

Step by step solution

01

Understand the Question

The question asks us to identify the flaw in the critic's response to the historian. We need to evaluate each option to determine which one correctly identifies this flaw.
02

Analyze Each Option

Go through each of the provided options to see what flaw it points out in the argument and determine its relevance: - **Option A**: This option suggests that the flaw is the use of consistent evidence, yet lacking to address the possibility of a timber trade. This does not clearly show a flaw in reasoning based on evidence. - **Option B**: Suggests citing current laws without relevance to the historical context, which could be a weak link. - **Option C**: Indicates a failure to recognize the difference between indirect and direct evidence. This is more about misunderstanding the type of evidence than a flaw in reasoning. - **Option D**: Points out that there is no account of the distinction between a law's existence at a time and its presence in a legal code then. This seems to show a misunderstanding relevant to the situation. - **Option E**: Indicates accepting an assumption without question. That's pointing more towards a blind acceptance which could reveal a flaw.
03

Evaluate the Best Option

From the analysis, **Option D** addresses a fundamental misunderstanding by the critic regarding the difference between the enactment of a law and its existence in a legal code at a given time. This reflects a failure to appropriately understand the historical context.

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.

Logical Flaws
In critical reasoning, identifying logical flaws in arguments is key to evaluating the strength and validity of the conclusions. A logical flaw can arise when an argument assumes a conclusion without proper support, or when the evidence presented does not directly lead to the stated conclusion. Here are some common logical flaws:
  • *Faulty Generalizations:* Drawing conclusions from inadequate evidence. For instance, assuming that one specific case applies to all other similar cases without further investigation.
  • *False Causality:* Confusing correlation with causation, such as believing that because two events occur together, one causes the other.
  • *Circular Reasoning:* When the argument circles back on itself, using its conclusion as one of its premises.
  • *Ignoring Alternative Explanations:* Overlooking other possible reasons or explanations for a given piece of evidence or observed situation.
When evaluating an argument, pay close attention to these potential pitfalls. This helps you dissect the reasoning and ensure that the evidence provided genuinely supports the conclusion reached. Avoiding logical flaws improves the clarity and effectiveness of your arguments.
Historical Analysis
Historical analysis involves examining past events and interpreting them in context. It's crucial to understand the implications of laws, social norms, and economic conditions during the time period being studied. Here are important steps in conducting historical analysis:
  • *Contextual Understanding:* Look at the cultural, political, and social context of the period. This helps understand why events happened as they did.
  • *Chronological Order:* Understanding the sequence of events can provide clarity about cause and effect relationships.
  • *Source Evaluation:* Analyze primary and secondary sources for reliability and bias. This ensures the information used is valid and supportive of the analysis.
  • *Contrast with Present:* Comparing historical events to current times can offer insights into how past conditions differ from today.
By carefully analyzing these elements, historians attempt to reconstruct the past accurately. It's essential for anyone engaged in historical analysis to question their assumptions and seek corroborating evidence whenever possible.
Evidence Evaluation
Evaluating evidence involves assessing whether the information supports conclusions logically and rigorously. Evidence is the backbone of a strong argument and understanding the type of evidence is crucial in critical reasoning. Here's a breakdown of the evaluation process:
  • *Direct vs. Indirect Evidence:* Direct evidence provides straightforward, direct proof of a fact, while indirect or circumstantial evidence suggests a fact through inference.
  • *Source Reliability:* Determine the trustworthiness of the evidence by considering the source's credibility, expertise, and potential biases.
  • *Relevance and Sufficiency:* Ensure that the evidence directly pertains to the argument and that there's enough to convincingly support the conclusion.
  • *Contradictory Evidence:* Always consider if there is evidence that challenges the conclusions. This helps to create a balanced view.
By methodically evaluating evidence, you can separate sound arguments from those with insufficient support. This process is central to forming well-founded conclusions in critical reasoning scenarios.
Legal Code Interpretation
Interpreting legal codes requires understanding both the letter and the intent of laws within their historical and cultural context. Misunderstandings often arise from overlooking the timing and origins of legal enactments. Here are some guidelines:
  • *Historical Context:* Laws must be interpreted in the context of the period they were enacted. This context gives insight into their purpose and scope.
  • *Literal vs. Intent-Based Interpretation:* While the literal meaning of the text is important, understanding the legislators' intent can guide more accurate interpretations.
  • *Codification and Modification:* Recognize distinctions between when a law was first enacted and later incorporated into legal codes. This helps in understanding its current application.
  • *Comparative Analysis:* Comparing laws across different jurisdictions or time periods can highlight underlying principles and their evolution.
A thorough grasp of these aspects is necessary for legal code interpretation to be accurate and insightful. It ensures that interpretations account for changes over time and across different legal frameworks.

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

Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics - one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare? Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument? (A) The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced. (B) If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort. (C) Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries. (D) In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research. (E) Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.

The National Association of Fire Fighters says that 45 percent of homes now have smoke detectors, whereas only 30 percent of homes had them 10 years ago. This makes early detection of house fires no more likely, however, because over half of the domestic smoke detectors are either without batteries or else inoperative for some other reason. In order for the conclusion above to be properly drawn, which one of the following assumptions would have to be made? (A) Fifteen percent of domestic smoke detectors were installed less than 10 years ago. (B) The number of fires per year in homes with smoke detectors has increased. (C) Not all of the smoke detectors in homes are battery operated. (D) The proportion of domestic smoke detectors that are inoperative has increased in the past ten years. (E) Unlike automatic water sprinklers, a properly functioning smoke detector cannot by itself increase fire safety in a home.

Famous personalities found guilty of many types of crimes in well-publicized trials are increasingly sentenced to the performance of community service, though unknown defendants convicted of similar crimes almost always serve prison sentences. However, the principle of equality before the law rules out using fame and publicity as relevant considerations in the sentencing of convicted criminals. The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following conclusions? (A) The principle of equality before the law is rigorously applied in only a few types of criminal trials. (B) The number of convicted celebrities sentenced to community service should equal the number of convicted unknown defendants sentenced to community service. (C) The principle of equality before the law can properly be overridden by other principles in some cases. (D) The sentencing of celebrities to community service instead of prison constitutes a violation of the principle of equality before the law in many catses. (E) The principle of equality before the law does not allow for leniency in sentencing.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument? (A) Many more people who currently walk to the library live in central Redville than in central Glenwood. (B) The number of people living in central Glenwood who would use the library if it were located there is smaller than the number of people living in central Redville who currently use the library. (C) The number of people using the public library would continue to increase steadily if the library were moved to Glenwood. (D) Most of the people who currently either drive to the library or take public transportation to reach it would continue to do so if the library were moved to central Glenwood. (E) Most of the people who currently walk to the library would remain library users if the library were relocated to central Glenwood.

Of the following, which one would the author most likely say is the most troublesome barrier facing working parents with primary child-care responsibility? (A) the lack of full-time jobs open to women (B) the inflexibility of work schedules (C) the low wages of part-time employment (D) the limited advancement opportunities for nonprofessional employees (E) the practice of allocating responsibilities in the workplace on the basis of gender
See all solutions

Recommended explanations on English Textbooks

Morphology

Read Explanation

Essay Writing Skills

Read Explanation

Discourse

Read Explanation

Argumentative Essay

Read Explanation

Essay Prompts

Read Explanation

5 Paragraph Essay

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.