Q14 - Essayist: Some researchers criticize

[magic.imango]

Is my reasoning for this question OK? Any help is much appreciated!

Premise: Some researchers criticize government for not releasing UFO info + info requests are brushed aside
Conclusion: Extraterrestrial UFOs have been sighted

The argument jumps from claiming info requests for UFOs are denied to conclude the the UFOs are in fact extraterrestrial. (They could be terrestrial; maybe the government is building its own spaceships?). To strengthen this argument, I need a choice that bridges this gap; something that is along the lines of: if the requests are ignored, then the UFOs are definitely alien. This is answer choice (B): government would withhold info about UFOs only if the UFOs were from other planets.

Incorrect Choices
(A) weakens -- if the government generally doesn't give access to any secure information then this would be an alternative reason for the government not allowing access to information about UFOs; it is because the information is secure and not because the UFOs are alien.

(C) out of scope -- I initially chose this one, but on a second read I realized this choice has nothing to do with the conclusion.

(D) out of scope -- this comparison between researchers does not relate to the argument

(E) out of scope -- the argument is not about what the government has always done with UFOs since the stimulus already clearly states that researchers have criticized the government for not releasing enough info.

[maryadkins]

Yeah! Great breakdown! Thanks for sharing.

[kyuya]

This question can be difficult if you don't read carefully.

(A) This would not strengthen, but rather, may even weaken the argument. If they are generally not forthcoming with secure information, perhaps that is the reason civilians are getting blown off and not because the government doesn't want people to know about aliens.

(B) The correct answer. What this answer does is essentially makes a sufficient condition which leads to the conclusion we would want if we were the essayist.

The sufficient condition stems from what we already know in this argument: the British government is withholding some information. What this answer choice does is turn this into the sufficient condition for UFO's being from another planet. Pretty strong answer choice.

(C) This one can be tricky, and the reasons are twofold; it is broad and furthermore, it is somewhat baits you into making some assumptions about the stimulus and the intent of the government agencies.

It is broad because having "something to hide" doesn't necessarily mean UFO's were found that were extraterrestrial in origin. It could mean that the government spent a bunch of money on trips for private sector employees and therefore has "something to hide".

Additionally, it never truly states the government has "something to hide". I think this is distinct from withholding information. Perhaps they withhold information for things that would be arbitrary to the general public, but is necessitated for some other reason, therefore giving them a reason to withhold information without needing to hide things from these researchers.

(D) Draws a comparison out of nowhere concerning trust. Not releasing info military researchers helped get does NOT mean they trust them more at all.. we are not given a basis to draw inferences on who is trusted more.

(E) If it has always attempted to deny the existence, it doesn't bolster the argument being made in the stimulus. This could potentially mean the denials preclude the request denials, therefore not making the denials a great indicator of whether or not the government is hiding UFO's or not. It would simply be the continuation of a trend that has always been. May actually weaken the argument.