Q13 - Papercrete promising material

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Flaw

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: Papercrete is probably promising for large-scale construction.
Evidence: People who regularly work with papercrete (builders who work primarily on small-scale projects) think that papercrete is promising for large-scale construction, and these people are familiar with the properties of the material.

Answer Anticipation:
The issue under debate is whether P is promising for large-scale construction. Most builders say "no", but a minority of builders say "yes". The author is taking the side of this minority. Why? Why should we think that this minority is right and that the majority of builders is wrong? The author is saying "this minority works regularly work P, and they are familiar with its properties". In order for THAT to count as an advantage in this debate, we'd have to assume that MOST builders are NOT familiar with P's properties. Beyond that assumption, we might simply debate this argument by saying "just cuz you have more familiarity with something doesn't mean you're more knowledgeable about everything concerning it". (An analagous argument would sound like "Although most people don't think that Gary Johnson is a viable presidential candidate, those who work with him think otherwise. And since those who work with him are familiar with his personality and policies, it is likely that Gary Johnson IS a viable presidential candidate)

Correct Answer:
E

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) This is tempting, but "confuses X with Y" means that we were talking about X in the evidence and talking about Y in the conclusion. However, the argument never makes a switch from discussing what's promising for small scale to discussing what's promising for large scale. We are always talking about whether or not it's promising for large scale. The people who believe it's promising for large scale happen to work on small-scale proejcts, but that doesn't mean we ever talked about whether papercrete is promising for small-scale projects. If the argument went more like "Since those who regularly use papercrete find it a promising for their needs, it is likely that papercrete is indeed promising for large-scale construction", then (A) would be appropriate.

(B) Presumes + extreme ("must") = red flag. In this case, the author is actually assuming that what most builders are WRONG about whether papercrete is promising, so this is not only extreme but also goes in the wrong direction.

(C) Famous Flaw = red flag. Using a "term" with two different meanings is usually a wrong answer. The word "promising" definitely does have multiple meanings: encouraging vs. stating a personal commitment …. but the argument is consistently using it to mean "encouraging, useful".

(D) Opposite. The author DOES consider the views of those who regularly use the material.

(E) Correct! Remember, the author was assuming that most builders are NOT familiar with papercrete's properties (otherwise, why would it be a premise to say "Since regularl papercrete users ARE familiar with papercrete's properties, we should trust THEM"?) In our Gary Johnson analogy, this is saying "the author fails to consider that most people are also familiar with his personality and policies and that is precisely why they don't think he's a viable presidential candidate".

Takeaway/Pattern: This is a tough problem for most people. (A) is very tempting and (E) does not beat you over the head with its usefulness. One of the most critical things to be thinking is simply, "Hey, author, you're basically offering ONE group's opinion vs. ANOTHER group's opinion, and saying we should trust the latter crowd. What's your reason for thinking THEIR opinion is more likely correct?" Since the only advantage the author gives to the latter crowd is that THEY are familiar with papercrete's properties, she must be assuming that the former crowd is not. And getting ourselves to identify that assumption makes (E) resonate quite a bit more.

#officialexplanation

[nayanthikaram]

Hi, can anyone explain to me why E is the correct answer and not A. The conclusion seems to proceed on the basis that merely because papercrete is considered by those who use it in small scale projects to be promising, it is likely to be promising for large-scale as well. I thought this was a flaw aptly represented in (A).

[WeiW222]

I got this one wrong in the first place and will try to explain it here. Any comment would be great!
A is wrong for 2 reasons:
1. If we read more closely, we would notice that The part that talks about small scale projects is actually the background info. The actual supporting premise is the sentence starts with [since], which uses familiarity as a support to the conclusion. Hence it makes sense for us to expect the occurrence of familiarity in the CA.
2. In that trapping background info sentence, it actually says [primarily]. If I'm not mistaken, that is different from [totally] in that it is harder to rebute. To me it means that there could be SOME of those builders use it on large scale projects. Therefore we can't say the author confuses small vs large scale.

[creek1262]

Hi, I have a question--I got this question right and I was second guessing if I really knew the reasoning behind choosing the correct answer.
During the test, I was debating between A and E and ultimately chose E because it attacked the support of the conclusion as well (which was that those who regularly use the material will be more familiar with the material).
But reading what others have said about A, it seems more tempting now.

I found this tempting because of the word "otherwise" in the stimulus.
If most builders on large projects don't think that the material is promising yet those that work on small projects think otherwise, doesn't that convey that builders on small projects believe the opposite of what most large project builders believe in, which is that it IS promising?

The "but not otherwise" introduces bi-conditional relationship, so wouldn't otherwise propose a conditional one?
I think I might be digging too much but I just wanted to make sure.
In the end, E is the stronger answer but I wanted to gain insight on what I should expect when I see the word "otherwise" in LR questions.

Thank you so much.

[ohthatpatrick]

"Otherwise" basically means "NOT - that idea."

Karen thinks that it's cold outside.
Jim thinks otherwise.

translation: "Jim thinks that it is not cold outside"

I wouldn't call it a conditional trigger. I understand the "but not otherwise" phrase you were recalling from a rule, but that isn't common language, so you might be digging too deep here.

Sometimes "otherwise" is used in relation to conditional rules.
If it rains, we'll go to the mall.
Otherwise, we'll go to the playground.

The 'otherwise' is to be understood as "NOT - [it rains]".
If it doesn't rain, we'll go to the playground.


As for the (A) vs. (E) discussion, I think the previous poster had two wonderful observations about why (A) is off. Check those out again and see if you understand them. Here's what I will add about (A):

People hear this argument going from
"small-scale builders like it --> it's promising for large-scale"

and (A) is saying the argument goes from
"It's promising for small-scale --> it's promising for large-scale"

So people picking (A) are equating
"small-scale builders like it" = "it's promising for small-scale"

But it doesn't say small-scale builders "like it" or small-scale builders "think it's promising". It's pitting "most builders" vs. "people who regularly work with papercrete" (this second group primarily uses it on small-scale, but apparently also uses it somewhat on larger-scale)

Most builders don't think papercrete is promising for large-scale construction.
but
Builders who regularly work with papercrete think otherwise

translation: builders who regularly work with papercrete think "papercrete is promising for large-scale construction".

This argument isn't trying to be a Comparison Flaw, like "How can we be sure that what's true for small-scale will be true for large-scale?"

It's trying to be an argument that pits two points of view against each other (like "previous studies" vs. "this new study"). The author arbitrarily sides with one point of view, without giving any satisfactory reason why we should favor that point of view over the other.

Author:
Most builders say X.
But a minority of builders who regularly work with P, say ~X.
I believe the 2nd group.

why?
because they're familiar with the properties of P.

that's the reason you trust them? Is that even an advantage they hold over 'Most builders'? What if most builders ALSO are familiar with the properties of P? You need to give us a better reason why you're siding with 2nd group's opinion.

(E) is essentially sticking up for the wisdom of "most builders", saying "They are ALSO familiar with papercrete's properties, which is precisely why they don't think it would work well for large-scale construction."

[ReginaP412]

"Otherwise" basically means "NOT - that idea."

This argument isn't trying to be a Comparison Flaw, like "How can we be sure that what's true for small-scale will be true for large-scale?"

It's trying to be an argument that pits two points of view against each other (like "previous studies" vs. "this new study"). The author arbitrarily sides with one point of view, without giving any satisfactory reason why we should favor that point of view over the other.

Author:
Most builders say X.
But a minority of builders who regularly work with P, say ~X.
I believe the 2nd group.

why?
because they're familiar with the properties of P.

that's the reason you trust them? Is that even an advantage they hold over 'Most builders'? What if most builders ALSO are familiar with the properties of P? You need to give us a better reason why you're siding with 2nd group's opinion.

(E) is essentially sticking up for the wisdom of "most builders", saying "They are ALSO familiar with papercrete's properties, which is precisely why they don't think it would work well for large-scale construction."

That's super helpful, thank you.

If the last sentence of the argument read more like " Since papercrete is promising for small scale projects, it's likely promising for large scale." -- would that be a comparison flaw?

I often think I found the flaw only to realize it just LOOKS like the one I'm thinking of... trying to get better at identifying what's tricking me. Thanks.

[Misti Duvall]

That's super helpful, thank you.

If the last sentence of the argument read more like " Since papercrete is promising for small scale projects, it's likely promising for large scale." -- would that be a comparison flaw?

I often think I found the flaw only to realize it just LOOKS like the one I'm thinking of... trying to get better at identifying what's tricking me. Thanks.[/quote]


Yep, I think you're on the right track! It would also probably focus on little less on what the two groups think and more on what makes papercrete good for small scale projects, then make a jump in the conclusion that it's therefore good for large scale projects.