Passage Summary: A critic says a translation is bad because it doesn't match the author's original intent. The translator says that since we can't possibly know that intent, the critic's point is invalid.

Conclusion: Dr. Abner's criticism of the translation is not justified.

Reasoning: Dr. Abner claims the translation is inaccurate because it fails to evoke the original intended feelings, but we have no way of knowing what those original feelings or intentions were.

Analysis: The translator is guilty of an 'absence of evidence' flaw. Just because the translator believes we *cannot know* the original intent doesn't mean Dr. Abner is wrong or that his criticism is 'unjustified.' The translator is essentially saying, 'You can't prove you're right, so you must be wrong.' Look for an answer choice that describes this error of concluding that a claim is false simply because there is insufficient evidence to prove it is true.