Question

Which one of the following exhibits both of the logical flaws exhibited by the argument above?

a) An argument asserting that a scientific theory is false because scientists with different viewpoints may interpret the evidence differently.

b) An argument claiming that no historical events can be accurately reconstructed because historical accounts are inherently biased.

c) An argument stating that a proposed environmental policy is flawed because people's opinions on environmental issues are subjective.

d) An argument concluding that the results of a psychological study cannot be trusted because participants may have provided inaccurate information.

Answer 1

Option (b) implies no historical events can be accurately reconstructed due to biased accounts, reflecting the logical flaws of misinterpreting evidence and misusing subjectivity to discredit a field.

Step-by-step explanation:

The logical flaws in question seem to be related to the misinterpretation of scientific evidence and the subjectivity of viewpoints misused to discredit scientific theories or findings. We're looking for an option that contains these two flaws. Option (b) suggests that no historical events can be reconstructed due to bias, which implies that subjective interpretations completely negate the reliability of evidence. This fits both the logical flaws mentioned - it both discounts evidence due to potential bias (misinterpretation of scientific evidence) and relies on the notion that all historical reconstruction is subjective, which misuses subjectivity to discredit the field (subjective viewpoints). Therefore, option (b) exhibits both logical flaws.