Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Dobson: Some historians claim that the people who built a [#permalink]
25 Jul 2004, 17:50
100% (01:48) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions
Dobson: Some historians claim that the people who built a ring of stones thousands of years ago in Britain were knowledgeable about celestial
events. The ground for this claim is that two of the stones determine a line pointing directly to the position of the sun at sunrise at the spring equinox. There are many stones in the ring, however, so the chance that one pair will point in a celestially significant direction is large. Therefore, the people who built the ring were not knowledgeable about celestial events.
Which one of the following is an error of reasoning in Dobsonâ€™s argument?
(A) The failure of cited evidence to establish a statement is taken as evidence that that statement is false.
(B) Dobsonâ€™s conclusion logically contradicts some of the evidence presented in support of it.
(C) Statements that absolutely establish Dobsonâ€™s conclusion are treated as if they merely give some support to that conclusion.
(D) Something that is merely a matter of opinion is treated as if it were subject to verification as a matter of fact.
(E) Dobsonâ€™s drawing the conclusion relies on interpreting a key term in two different ways.
Re: CR - Dobson - good one [#permalink]
25 Jul 2004, 18:02
Will go with A on this one.
cited evidence: stones pointing to the sun
statement: Were those people knowledgeable about celestial events?
Because the evidence is not convincing enuf to prove that they were knowledgeable, the author concludes that they were not knowledgeable.
This is exactly stated in A
Dobson can see the flaw in historians claim and is of the opinion that there is nothing unique about two stones out of number of them pointing to the sun. In the same breadth Dobson is also incorrect as he assumes that a pair pointing the sun is not unique - can very well be unique.