2.7 Conclusions 53
Commentary
There are multiple-choice questions like this
in some but not all critical thinking syllabuses
and examination papers, and in some
admissions tests to universities or professions.
It is good practice to try some from time to
time, and you can find plenty of sample
papers with sets of such questions on various
examination websites.
Unless you are told otherwise, only one of the
options is correct. That is the case here. The
other options either correspond to one of the
reasons, or to an intermediate conclusion, or to a
piece of background information; or they
misrepresent the conclusion altogether. Usually
in such tests, you are not required to give any
explanation or justification for your choice, but
because this is a learning activity, you were asked
to say why you made the choice you did, and
why you rejected the others. (You should always
do this when you are using multiple-choice
questions to improve your skills.)
So how did you go about the task? Did you
read the passage, then immediately look
through A–E to find the most promising
response? If so, you were asking for trouble.
This is not a good strategy. Although the
incorrect responses are not designed to trick
you, they are designed to make you think.
They are called distracters, and with good
reason, for it is very easy to be tempted by an
answer because it echoes something in the
passage, or simply because it ‘sounds right’.
A much safer approach is to ignore the
responses A–E completely while you analyse
the argument and identify its conclusion
yourself; then to look for the response that best
matches your analysis. That way you are not
so much looking for an answer as looking for
confirmation of your own answer. If you find
a response that matches yours, you will have
two good reasons for choosing it, not one.
So, what’s the argument here? The passage
starts by claiming that parents tend to think
they know best and consequently assume their
decisions and judgements are the right ones.
This has the look of an argument already, but it
is clearly not making the author’s own point.
For, like the tennis argument in Chapter 2.6,
the opening sentences are followed by the
word ‘But’, signalling an opposing view. What
parents think is therefore just the introduction
or target for the real argument.
The author’s own argument stems from the
claim that children are often wiser than
parents think, supported by observations
about their problem-solving skills, and so on.
Then comes the recommendation that
parents should pay children more attention
and allow them to make more decisions. This
also looks a likely conclusion, but does it
follow from the claim that children are wiser
than their parents think, or support it?
Clearly it does follow: the passage is not
saying (nor would it make much sense to say)
that parents should pay closer attention to
their children, and therefore children are
wiser than their parents think. So, a full and
fair analysis would be:
Context: Parents naturally tend to think
that . . . they know better than their
children, etc.
But . . .
R1 Children frequently display problem-solving
skills that their parents do not possess.
R2 They are more adventurous in their
thinking.IC In many ways children are much cleverer
than their parents give them credit for.
R3 Paying closer attention etc. would help to
relieve family tensions.D Parents should attend more to what
their children say, and allow them to make
more decisions.
E A reduction in family tensions would result
if parents listened more to what their
children think.