Q6 - The simultaneous and apparently independent

[noah]

6. (A)
Question type: Identify the flaw
This argument concludes that people unconsciously fear the horse. The reasoning: Myths are often an expression of unconscious thoughts, and many cultures have a violent half-horse-half-human mythical figure, despite the fact that people generally consider horses to be gentle. The flaw in this argument, as (A) describes, is that even if the mythical figure reflects an unconscious fear, it does not necessarily reflect a fear of the horse half of the half-horse-half-human beast. Perhaps it is the human that we fear, or the animalistic tendencies of humans.

(B) is out of scope since the beast could or could not represent an unconscious fear of horses whether people have good reason to fear horses.
(C) is out of scope. There is no discussion of suppression.
(D) is out of scope. The conclusion does not depend on a culture spontaneously creating the myth instead of borrowing it from another culture. Either way, the beast could represent an unconscious fear (or not).
(E) is unsupported. While the argument does not explain why myths are used to express unconscious thoughts, it is stated as a premise and can be used to support the argument until it is proven false.

[shirando21]

what is this type of flaw called?

[noah]

what is this type of flaw called?

I see you're into categories!

We don't name our flaws like other curricula do, though we definitely notice patterns (and, it's fine to name those patterns, we just want students to focus on something else--though if it helps you, go for it). Here, I see a whole:part issue. The fear is of the whole beast, and the conclusion assumes it relates to a specific part.

I hope that's helpful.

[shirando21]

Thanks, Noah.

I wasn't sure about whether the relationship btw horses and half human, half horse creatures is more like a whole group and a specific example, or two different concepts, which would make this flaw more like a mistaken identity...

[samuelfbaron]

This argument is actually not too difficult to grasp upon second reading. First reading under timed conditions I struggled a bit:

Premise:
Development of myth featuring human/horse creature, portrayed as savage.

Conclusion:
Myths express unconscious thoughts, the human/horse creature is indicative of people's fear of horses.

Basically the argument (in a lot of convoluted language) that people are afraid of horses because of the development of a human-horses creature. As Noah mentioned above the conclusion does not follow from the premises. Just because we are afraid of a human-horse creature does not mean that we are afraid of horses. I am afraid of LIONS but I am not afraid of housecats. (A) addresses the flaw, albeit in different terms.

[T.J.]

I was wrong on this question because I anticipated something different than the actual flaw. My first thought was that this question has a causal flaw in that the author attributes the mythical creatures to unconscious fear of horse. And then I went on to look for an answer that weakens the causal chain. That's why I chose D. However, the stimulus really talks about cultures as a whole, rather than one particular culture in which case my reasoning would be more valid. Thus, the flaw really comes down to whether the myth represents the horse in people's mind.
The flaw questions sometimes are difficult for me because I tend to think differently than the test-makers, and then find out that they really mean it differently than I think.

[Antnat]

Could someone please explain why (B) is incorrect? I thought that if people had legitimate reasons to fear horses, then it wouldn't be an "unconscious fear".

[tommywallach]

Noah's explanation is the correct reason though. Did that make sense?

-t

[Antnat]

Thanks for your response, Tommy.
I just realized my mistake! I think I misread B-- I see why A is correct, thank you!

[jo.li0627]

Could someone please explain why (B) is incorrect? I thought that if people had legitimate reasons to fear horses, then it wouldn't be an "unconscious fear".

I have the same question. If people have good reason to fear horses, then they are not unconscious of their fear of the horses. Could someone explain this for me?

[tommywallach]

I can have a good reason to fear something and not know that I fear it. One is about cause, the other is about self-knowledge. Everyone has a good reason to fear drowning, but that has no effect on either 1) whether you fear it or 2) whether you know you fear it.

-t