PrepTest 114

Incorrect. The argument relies on the experts claiming that coffee is both healthy and not healthy to question the usefulness of their recommendations into question. It's the contradiction in the advice—not the rightness or wrongness of any specific piece of advice—that is relevant here. If coffee is dangerous, then the advice saying it wasn't dangerous was wrong; if coffee isn't dangerous, then the advice saying it is was wrong. In either case, there's expert advice out there that's not great!

Incorrect. The argument concludes that expert advice is "useless" in guiding decisions on health, so it doesn't assume that that advice is wanted.

Incorrect. The conclusion limits itself to expert advice on questions of health. If it had a more generic conclusion that expert advice was useless in any area, then this answer would be a consideration. As is, it's out of scope.

Incorrect. The conclusion is that the expert advice isn't trustworthy, so this answer is the opposite of what we're looking for.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Reports from year to year state that the same substances are healthy and not healthy, so expert opinions are useless to making health decisions.

Answer Anticipation:
The conclusion here is pretty strong—it calls the advice of experts "useless" because some of it contradicts other advice. In order for that to be justified, it would need to be shown that there's no potential use for that advice whatsoever.

That's a pretty extreme statement, and one that's not backed up by the evidence. Sure, experts sometimes say that substances—e.g., coffee—are dangerous to health, whereas the next year they say there's a benefit. But that doesn't mean the advice is useless.

First, it's possible that one of the two sets of experts is correct, and their advice would be useful. It's also possible that both of the statements are correct and there isn't a true contradiction—for instance, coffee might raise blood pressure but also enhance the immune system.

Since the conclusion states that expert advice is "useless" when it comes to health, any answer that suggests the advice might have some use will serve to highlight a flaw in the argument.

Answer Explanation:
This answer brings up a possibility that the experts were right with both pieces of "contradictory" advice—it wasn't really contradictory, because they were discussing healthy and unhealthy aspects of the same substance. As such, that advice—even when it seems to contradict other advice—can be useful, if you dig in to see the details of it.

Key Takeaway:
Extreme language in the conclusion is generally related to the flaw, as the premises need to be equally strong to support it. Also, when there's a claimed contradiction, check to see if it's possible that both sides are correct.