Recognize the distinction
An expert's judgment can matter when the expertise is relevant and the judgment is based on the issue at hand. A prize in chemistry does not automatically settle transit scheduling. Similarly, a speaker's financial interest can prompt scrutiny without showing that the speaker's factual claim is false. Assess the connection between the cited reason and the conclusion.
Choose a method
Separate a credibility concern from a disproof. A biased source may make a true claim, and an admirable source may make a mistaken one. Novelty is a date, not a performance test. A proposal's origin in a rival organization does not determine whether it will work locally. An independent test directly addressing the claim is usually more relevant than an unrelated personal fact.
Worked contrast
The developer might profit from a bus route while the neighborhood genuinely lacks transit. An independent travel survey bears on the transport need; the developer's car color does not. A circular defense of a newspaper offers a different problem: saying reports are reliable because the paper is trustworthy gives no independent support if trustworthiness was inferred only from those same reports.
Transfer and check
For transfer, examine an endorsement by a famous athlete of a computer-security product. Ask which knowledge the claim requires and whether the endorsement supplies it. Avoid the opposite mistake of assuming all testimony is worthless. The task is to evaluate relevance and support, not to replace one blanket judgment with another.
A celebrated chemist says a proposed bus timetable will reduce waiting times. The chemist has won several scientific prizes. An advocate concludes: The timetable will reduce waiting times. Which statement is the advocate's main conclusion?
- The advocate offers these observations: A celebrated chemist says a proposed bus timetable will reduce waiting times. The chemist has won several scientific prizes.
- The target claim is introduced as what the advocate concludes: The timetable will reduce waiting times.
- Identifying a conclusion does not require accepting it; the task concerns its argumentative role.
Compare the other answer choices
This is a stated premise, offered as evidence rather than the target conclusion.
This is background or supporting information, not the claim the advocate infers.
This adds a stronger claim than the advocate actually states.
This is a possible counterfinding, not the claim the advocate aims to establish.
Try it, then explain it.
Complete a short set without looking at the example. After each answer, explain which evidence or rule supports your decision and why the alternatives do not fit.
Sources & authorship
Original Slope explanations and examples. References support the concepts; they are not the source of copied questions. Independent educator review is pending.
Logical Reasoning skills