Critical Reasoning

18. 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 Dobson's argument?
(A) The failure of cited evidence to establish a
statement is taken as evidence that that
statement is false.
(B) Dobson's conclusion logically contradicts some
of the evidence presented in support of it.
(C) Statements that absolutely establish Dobson'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) Dobson's drawing the conclusion relies on
interpreting a key term in two different ways.

help, no clue how to attack this monster,
answer in sometime

bblast wrote:18. 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 Dobson's argument?
(A) The failure of cited evidence to establish a
statement is taken as evidence that that
statement is false.
(B) Dobson's conclusion logically contradicts some
of the evidence presented in support of it.
(C) Statements that absolutely establish Dobson'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) Dobson's drawing the conclusion relies on
interpreting a key term in two different ways.

help, no clue how to attack this monster,
answer in sometime

I am confused between A and E , however I picked E . Let me know the OA, in case its E , I can explain.

Thanks for posting a good question

i also went for E, but thats the trap,
OA is A

I choose A.

Dobson is making a statement and rejecting it because there is no evidence to show that it is true but at the same time, there is no evidence to show that it is not true. Moreover, Dobson is not providing evidence of his own to contradict the claim.

1. Claim: The British had knowledge of celestial bodies because stones pointed in a certain direction
2. Dobson: There are alot of stones so something has to point in that direction
3. conclusion: Statement 1 must be false.

A. Correct. This is exactly what Dobson is doing. He does not cite any evidence to prove his theory correct. What he does is provide evidence that casts doubt on the original claim, but then makes the leap that it means the original claim must be false. All he does is say that their reasoning is flawed, but that does not mean the conclusion is false.

B. Incorrect. There is no contradiction.

C. Incorrect. There are really no statements that only give some support the conclusion here.

D. Incorrect. Dobsons statements are likely fact and could be verified.

E. Incorrect. This isnt a matter of looking at something two different ways. Dobson simply look at the evidence in one way and draws a conclusion from it.