Q5 - Jenkins maintains that the movie Firepower

[mshinners]

Question Type:
ID the Flaw

Stimulus Breakdown:
J claims Firepower wasn't intended to cause antisocial behavior, but it did. Therefore, J must be wrong.

Answer Anticipation:
Any time you see a mention of goals, motives, or intentions, the argument is probably jumping between them and reality. The outcome of an action doesn't speak to the motives for that action; the motives don't speak to the outcome.

Correct answer:
(E)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Wrong flaw (Ad Hominem). While it's possible Jenkins is biased, the author never brings this up, or mentions facts establishing it with certainty.

(B) Wrong flaw (Correlation/Causation). First, the conclusion isn't causal. Second, the premise establishes that the movie did cause ("produced") behavior, and a Correlation/Causation flaw requires a correlative premise.

(C) Wrong flaw (Part to Whole). While one might argue that "many" audience members constitute a part (though I'd call that a stretch), there's no jump to a Whole.

(D) If anything, the argument relies on this answer being true (if anyone commits this flaw, it's Jenkins).

(E) Bingo. This answer choice gets at the split between outcome and intention.

Takeaway/Pattern:
Language about motives and language about outcomes should lead you down the path to considering this flaw.

#officialexplanation