Please help me with this one.....

[tim]

i'll let you do this yourself. take any argument at all. write a sentence that is the opposite of the conclusion. there's your example..

[750plus]

This is such a horrible question, I don't know if I should say that. But, this is what I felt.

Premise: People help others > brain releases endorphins > feeling of well being. Also, release of endorphins > longevity. So, ultimately it's saying that if you help others, this increases the length of your life.

Statistic: Regular volunteer work > Longevity

Now, my question says that I have to break this statistic.

A says that if you are a women, you will live longer. So, a third fact is now responsible for longevity. So, this breaks the causality.

Have I interpreted it correctly Team.

Regards
Rajat Gugnani

[RonPurewal]

This is such a horrible question, I don't if I should say that. But, this is what I felt.

it's not. it's quite will-written, actually—especially given the amount of information contained in it.

if you doubt that the problem is well written, go ahead and try to write it with fewer words! you'll find that this isn't possible without losing and/or distorting important aspects of meaning.

[RonPurewal]

a third fact is now responsible for longevity. So, this breaks the causality.

Have I interpreted it correctly Team.

the blue thing is exactly the point.

note that you're not 'breaking the statistic'. statistics are statistics; they are what they are.

the problem lies not in the statistic itself, but, rather, in how the statistic is interpreted. (the example of 'people who wear dresses' should make this more clear.)

[750plus]

This is such a horrible question, I don't if I should say that. But, this is what I felt.

it's not. it's quite will-written, actually—especially given the amount of information contained in it.

if you doubt that the problem is well written, go ahead and try to write it with fewer words! you'll find that this isn't possible without losing and/or distorting important aspects of meaning.

I just re read the argument and it makes sense.

I think you are right.

[750plus]

a third fact is now responsible for longevity. So, this breaks the causality.

Have I interpreted it correctly Team.

the blue thing is exactly the point.

note that you're not 'breaking the statistic'. statistics are statistics; they are what they are.

the problem lies not in the statistic itself, but, rather, in how the statistic is interpreted. (the example of 'people who wear dresses' should make this more clear.)

yes, understood.

thanks.

[tim]

[RonPurewal]

yes, understood.

thanks.

you're welcome.

[ToanD19]

Dear Ron,
I understand that forging a causal relationship from a correlation is fallacious; and this question would be much easier (for me) if it started from "statistic on adults who regularly ...". However, the whole bunch of decorations in the beginning of the sentence somewhat forms a causality:
helping people --> release endorphins --> live longer?
Please help me understand it better.
--------
BTW, I've been hunting your explanations for weeks now. those explainations are just what the doctor ordered!
you are like a hero protecting us from those villains in GMAC whose main purpose is to cause misery

[RonPurewal]

"helping people --> release endorphins" is definitely a connection.

"release endorphins --> live longer" may or may not be; it's not certain. (you may already understand this, since you put a question mark on this part.)

the passage is saying "this statistic makes sense regardless of whether that's a causal relationship". so, you need an explanation of why the statistic would still be expected, even if "release endorphins --> live longer" ISN'T a causal relationship.

[RonPurewal]

you are like a hero protecting us from those villains in GMAC whose main purpose is to cause misery

if you have this attitude ^^ toward the exam, you will NEVER do well on it.
never ever ever.

[ToanD19]

Many thanks, Ron.
I'll try to change my attitude towards the test makers.

[RonPurewal]

excellent