arguments and claims - the origin of intelligence
assigned by: jacob holt
due: nov 25, 2025 11:59 pm
reopened on: nov 25, 2025
1
★
2
define
vocabulary
3
model
4
your turn
your turn
item 2
what evidence does the writer provide to support her argument?
□ a. the writer cites the nature vs. nurture topic debated by researchers and scientists.
■ b. the writer relates an anecdote about friends who lament that they arent smart enough.
□ c. the writer points out that einstein was slow to develop into a genius.
□ d. the writer poses the question that if our intelligence level were fixed at birth, why cant toddlers read or drive a car
tn-ela: ● tn.s-10.ri.00 9

Question

Accepted Answer

# Brief Explanations:
To determine the correct answer, we analyze each option:
- Option A: Citing the nature vs. nurture debate is more of a topic introduction, not direct evidence for the argument about the origin of intelligence.
- Option B: Relating an anecdote about friends lamenting intelligence is personal and not strong evidence for the origin of intelligence.
- Option C: Pointing out Einstein's development is a specific example (anecdotal in a way but about a notable figure's intelligence development) that can support an argument about how intelligence develops (origin - related, like if it's not fixed at birth).
- Option D: Posing a question is a rhetorical device to make a point, but it's not evidence. It's a question to challenge the idea of fixed intelligence at birth, but not evidence.

Among these, Option C provides a specific example (Einstein's slow development into a genius) that can be used as evidence to support an argument about the origin of intelligence (e.g., that intelligence develops over time, not fixed at birth). Wait, actually, re - evaluating: The question is about the origin of intelligence. Let's re - check:

Wait, maybe I made a mistake. Let's re - analyze:

Option D: The question "if our intelligence level were fixed at birth, why can’t toddlers read or drive a car" is a logical argument (evidence in the form of a thought - experiment) to support that intelligence is not fixed at birth (relating to origin). But the original selected option in the image is B, but that seems incorrect. Wait, maybe the correct answer is D? Wait, no, let's look again.

Wait, the problem is about "what evidence does the writer provide to support her argument". Let's consider each:

A: Citing a debate is not evidence, just a topic.

B: Anecdote about friends is personal, not strong evidence for origin of intelligence.

C: Einstein's development: if the argument is about how intelligence develops (origin), showing that Einstein was slow to develop into a genius can show that intelligence develops over time (not fixed at birth), so this is evidence.

D: The question is a rhetorical device to argue that intelligence is not fixed at birth (since toddlers can't do adult tasks, so intelligence must develop), but it's a question, not evidence.

Wait, but maybe the intended answer is D? No, evidence is something that supports the claim. A question is a way to prompt thought, not evidence. So between C and D, C is a specific example (Einstein's development) which is evidence. But the image shows B selected, which is wrong. Wait, maybe the original problem's context is different. Wait, perhaps the correct answer is D? Wait, no, let's check again.

Wait, the argument is about the origin of intelligence. Let's assume the argument is that intelligence is not fixed at birth. Then:

- D poses a question that challenges the idea of fixed intelligence at birth (if it were fixed, toddlers should be able to do adult tasks, but they can't), so this is a form of evidence (a logical argument) to support that intelligence develops (origin is not fixed at birth).

- C: Einstein's slow development into a genius: this shows that his intelligence developed over time, so it's evidence that intelligence is not fixed at birth (origin is developmental).

So both C and D could be, but let's see the options again.

Wait, the user's image shows B selected, but that's incorrect. Let's re - evaluate the options:

Option B: "The writer relates an anecdote about friends who lament that they aren’t smart enough." This anecdote is about people's feelings about their intelligence, not about the origin of intelligence. So this is not evidence for the origin of intelligence.

Option D: The question is a logical argument (evidence in the form of a reductio ad absurdum) to show that intelligence is not fixed at birth (since if it were, toddlers would have adult intelligence and be able to do adult tasks). So this is evidence.

Option C: Einstein's development: shows that his intelligence developed, so it's evidence that intelligence is not fixed at birth.

But the correct answer is likely D or C. Wait, maybe the intended answer is D. But let's check the options again.

Wait, the problem is from an ELA (English Language Arts) context, so it's about analyzing text evidence. Let's assume the writer's argument is that intelligence is not fixed at birth. Then:

- D: The question is a piece of evidence because it presents a contradiction to the idea of fixed intelligence at birth (if fixed, toddlers would have adult intelligence, but they can't do adult tasks). So this is evidence.

- C: Einstein's development: shows that his intelligence developed, so it's evidence.

But between the two, D is a more direct logical argument (evidence) against fixed intelligence at birth.

Wait, but the original image has B selected, which is wrong. So perhaps there's a mistake in the original selection. But according to the analysis, the correct answer should be D? Or C?

Wait, let's check the options again:

A. The writer cites the nature vs. nurture topic debated by researchers and scientists. – Not evidence, just a topic.

B. The writer relates an anecdote about friends who lament that they aren’t smart enough. – Anecdote about personal feelings, not about origin of intelligence.

C. The writer points out that Einstein was slow to develop into a genius. – Example of a person's intelligence development, which can support an argument about how intelligence develops (origin).

D. The writer poses the question that if our intelligence level were fixed at birth, why can’t toddlers read or drive a car. – Rhetorical question to show that intelligence is not fixed at birth (since toddlers can't do adult tasks, so intelligence must develop), which is evidence.

So both C and D are related, but D is a more direct argument (evidence) in the form of a question that challenges the fixed - at - birth idea. So the correct answer is D? Or C?

Wait, maybe the intended answer is D. So the correct option is D. The writer poses the question that if our intelligence level were fixed at birth, why can’t toddlers read or drive a car.

# Answer:
D. The writer poses the question that if our intelligence level were fixed at birth, why can’t toddlers read or drive a car

Sovi.AI - AI Math Tutor

QUESTION IMAGE

Question

Explanation:

Answer: