L4 LR - CHAR. FLAW QUESTIONS
Byrne: One of our club's bylaws specifies that any officer who fails to appear on time for any one of the quarterly board meetings, or who misses two of our monthly general meetings, must be suspended. Thibodeaux, an officer, was recently suspended. But Thibodeaux has never missed a monthly general meeting. Therefore, Thibodeaux must have failed to appear on time for a quarterly board meeting. The reasoning in Byrne's argument is flawed in that the argument A fails to consider the possibility that Thibodeaux has arrived late for two or more monthly general meetings B presumes, without providing justification, that if certain events each produce a particular result, then no other event is sufficient to produce that result C takes for granted that an assumption required to establish the argument's conclusion is sufficient to establish that conclusion D fails to specify at what point someone arriving at a club meeting is officially deemed late E does not specify how long Thibodeaux has been an officer
INVERSE FALLACY
If the play were successful, it would be adapted as a movie or revived at the Decade Festival. But it is not successful. We must, regrettably, conclude that it will neither become a movie nor be revived at the Decade Festival. The argument's reasoning is flawed because the argument A fails to draw the conclusion that the play will not both be adapted as a movie and be revived at the Decade Festival, rather than that it will do neither B fails to explain in exactly what way the play is unsuccessful C equates the play's aesthetic worth with its commercial success D presumes, without providing justification, that there are no further avenues for the play other than adaptation as a movie or revival at the Decade Festival E fails to recognize that the play's not satisfying one sufficient condition does not preclude its satisfying a different sufficient condition for adaptation as a movie or revival at the Decade Festival
INVERSE FALLACY
OK, the instructor is obviously wrong in saying that since most BMW drivers cut her off, all BMW drivers are jerks who cut her off. But why? A She assumes that the car one drives is the only factor that influences how someone drives B She assumes that some members of a group having a certain attribute rules out the possibility that some members of that group do not have that attribute C She assumes without providing evidence that anyone who is a jerk will cut him off in traffic D You know what? Fallacies aside, I'm kind of with her on this one
LOGICAL FORCE FALLACY
Fortune-teller: Admittedly, the claims of some self-proclaimed "psychics" have been shown to be fraudulent, but the exposure of a few charlatans cannot alter the fundamental fact that it has not been scientifically proven that there is no such thing as extrasensory perception (ESP). Furthermore, since the failed attempts to produce such a proof have been so numerous, one must conclude that some individuals do possess ESP. The reasoning in the fortune-teller's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument A takes for granted that proof that many people lack a characteristic does not establish that everyone lacks that characteristic B takes for granted that the number of unsuccessful attempts to prove a claim is the only factor relevant to whether one should accept that claim C overlooks the possibility that some of the scientific studies mentioned reached inaccurate conclusions about whether ESP exists D takes for granted that there is no scientific way to determine whether some individuals possess ESP E takes for granted that the fact that a claim has not been demonstrated to be false establishes that it is true
ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE FALLACY
Editorial: The premier's economic advisor assures her that with the elimination of wasteful spending the goal of reducing taxes while not significantly decreasing government services can be met. But the premier should not listen to this advisor, who in his youth was convicted of embezzlement. Surely his economic advice is as untrustworthy as he is himself, and so the premier should discard any hope of reducing taxes without a significant decrease in government services. What's wrong with the editorial's reasoning? A An untrustworthy person could still make a plan that is trustworthy B Even if the advisor is untrustworthy, he could still provide other valuable services to the economic advisor C It assumes that one's trustworthiness is the only relevant factor in assessing the feasibility of a plan D C'mon ... embezzlement? That's white collar crime. That's not real crime. This dude is probably trustworthy.
AD HOMINEM
Editorial: The premier's economic advisor assures her that with the elimination of wasteful spending the goal of reducing taxes while not significantly decreasing government services can be met. But the premier should not listen to this advisor, who in his youth was convicted of embezzlement. Surely his economic advice is as untrustworthy as he is himself, and so the premier should discard any hope of reducing taxes without a significant decrease in government services. Which one of the following is a questionable argumentative strategy employed in the editorial's argument? A rejecting a proposal on the grounds that a particular implementation of the proposal is likely to fail B trying to win support for a proposal by playing on people's fears of what could happen otherwise C criticizing the source of a claim rather than examining the claim itself D taking lack of evidence for a claim as evidence undermining that claim E presupposing what it sets out to establish
AD HOMINEM
Politician: My opponent says our zoning laws too strongly promote suburban single-family dwellings and should be changed to encourage other forms of housing like apartment buildings. Yet he lives in a house in the country. His lifestyle contradicts his own argument, which should therefore not be taken seriously. The politician's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that A its characterization of the opponent's lifestyle reveals the politician's own prejudice against constructing apartment buildings B it neglects the fact that apartment buildings can be built in the suburbs just as easily as in the center of the city C it fails to mention the politician's own living situation D its discussion of the opponent's lifestyle is irrelevant to the merits of the opponent's argument E it ignores the possibility that the opponent may have previously lived in an apartment building
AD HOMINEM
Biologist: Many paleontologists have suggested that the difficulty of adapting to ice ages was responsible for the evolution of the human brain. But this suggestion must be rejected, for most other animal species adapted to ice ages with no evolutionary changes to their brains. The biologist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds? A It fails to address adequately the possibility that even if a condition is sufficient to produce an effect in a species, it may not be necessary to produce that effect in that species. B It fails to address adequately the possibility that a condition can produce a change in a species even if it does not produce that change in other species. C It overlooks the possibility that a condition that is needed to produce a change in one species is not needed to produce a similar change in other species. D It presumes without warrant that human beings were presented with greater difficulties during ice ages than were individuals of most other species. E It takes for granted that, if a condition coincided with the emergence of a certain phenomenon, that condition must have been causally responsible for the phenomenon.
COMPARISON FALLACY
The average length of stay for patients at Edgewater Hospital is four days, compared to six days at University Hospital. Since studies show that recovery rates at the two hospitals are similar for patients with similar illnesses, University Hospital could decrease its average length of stay without affecting quality of care. The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument A equates the quality of care at a hospital with patients' average length of stay B treats a condition that will ensure the preservation of quality of care as a condition that is required to preserve quality of care C fails to take into account the possibility that patients at Edgewater Hospital tend to be treated for different illnesses than patients at University Hospital D presumes, without providing justification, that the length of time patients stay in the hospital is never relevant to the recovery rates of these patients E fails to take into account the possibility that patients at University Hospital generally prefer longer hospital stays
COMPARISON FALLACY
Philosopher: Scientists talk about the pursuit of truth, but, like most people, they are self-interested. Accordingly, the professional activities of most scientists are directed toward personal career enhancement, and only incidentally toward the pursuit of truth. Hence, the activities of the scientific community are largely directed toward enhancing the status of that community as a whole, and only incidentally toward the pursuit of truth. The reasoning in the philosopher's argument is flawed because the argument A improperly infers that each and every scientist has a certain characteristic from the premise that most scientists have that characteristic B improperly draws an inference about the scientific community as a whole from a premise about individual scientists C presumes, without giving justification, that the aim of personal career enhancement never advances the pursuit of truth D illicitly takes advantage of an ambiguity in the meaning of "self-interested" E improperly draws an inference about a cause from premises about its effects
COMPOSITION FALLACY
Anthropologist: All music is based on a few main systems of scale building. Clearly, if the popularity of a musical scale were a result of social conditioning, we would expect, given the diversity of social systems, a diverse mixture of diatonic and nondiatonic scales in the world's music. Yet diatonic scales have always dominated the music of most of the world. Therefore, the popularity of diatonic music can be attributed only to innate dispositions of the human mind. The anthropologist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it fails to A consider the possibility that some people appreciate nondiatonic music more than they do diatonic musi B explain how innate dispositions increase appreciation of nondiatonic music C explain the existence of diatonic scales as well as the existence of nondiatonic scales D consider that innate dispositions and social conditioning could jointly affect the popularity of a type of music E consider whether any appreciation of nondiatonic music is demonstrated by some nonhuman species of animals
CORRECT AC DESCRIBES EXCLUSIVITY FALLACY
Commissioner: Budget forecasters project a revenue shortfall of a billion dollars in the coming fiscal year. Since there is no feasible way to increase the available funds, our only choice is to decrease expenditures. The plan before you outlines feasible cuts that would yield savings of a billion dollars over the coming fiscal year. We will be able to solve the problem we face, therefore, only if we adopt this plan. The reasoning in the commissioner's argument is flawed because this argument A relies on information that is far from certain B confuses being an adequate solution with being a required solution C inappropriately relies on the opinions of experts D inappropriately employs language that is vague E Takes for granted that there is no way to increase available funds
CORRECT AC DESCRIBES EXCLUSIVITY FALLACY
Beck: Our computer program estimates municipal automotive use based on weekly data. Some staff question the accuracy of the program's estimates. But because the figures it provides are remarkably consistent from week to week, we can be confident of its accuracy. The reasoning in Beck's argument is flawed in that it A fails to establish that consistency is a more important consideration than accuracy B fails to consider the program's accuracy in other tasks that it may perform C takes for granted that the program's output would be consistent even if its estimates were inaccurate D regards accuracy as the sole criterion for judging the program's value E fails to consider that the program could produce consistent but inaccurate output
EQUIVOCATION FALLACY
Concerned citizen: The mayor, an outspoken critic of the proposed restoration of city hall, is right when he notes that the building is outdated, but that the restoration would be expensive at a time when the budget is already tight. We cannot afford such a luxury item in this time of financial restraint, he says. However, I respectfully disagree. The building provides the last remaining link to the days of the city's founding, and preserving a sense of municipal history is crucial to maintaining respect for our city government and its authority. So to the question, "Can we really afford to?" I can only respond, "Can we afford not to?" Which one of the following most accurately characterizes a flaw in the concerned citizen's argument? A The argument is solely an emotional appeal to history. B The argument ambiguously uses the word "afford." C The argument inappropriately appeals to the authority of the mayor. D The argument incorrectly presumes that the restoration would be expensive. E The argument inappropriately relies on the emotional connotations of words such as "outdated" and "luxury."
EQUIVOCATION FALLACY
The peppered moth avoids predators by blending into its background, typically the bark of trees. In the late nineteenth century, those peppered moths with the lightest pigmentation had the greatest contrast with their backgrounds, and therefore were the most likely to be seen and eaten by predators. It follows, then, that the darkest peppered moths were the least likely to be seen and eaten. Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the reasoning of the argument? A The argument overlooks the possibility that light peppered moths had more predators than dark peppered moths. B The argument takes for granted that peppered moths are able to control the degree to which they blend into their backgrounds. C The argument presumes, without providing justification, that all peppered moths with the same coloring had the same likelihood of being seen and eaten by a predator me. D The argument overlooks the possibility that there were peppered moths of intermediate color that contrasted less with their backgrounds than the darkest peppered moths did. Exactly what we wanted. The argument is overlooking that their could be a middle ground which is even more effective than either extreme. E The argument presumes, without providing justification, that the only defense mechanism available to peppered moths was to blend into their backgrounds.
EXCLUSIVITY FALLACY
Answer choices that correct identify the common fallacy committed are always correct. Is the statement about Flaw questions true or false?
FALSE Even if an answer choice accurately describes a common fallacy, it still may be wrong if it does not accurately describe the argument's premises or conclusion. This is why we need to have a comprehensive understanding of the argument — we should always understand what the argument's premises and conclusion state, on top of the common fallacy.
A questionable assumption is a premise that the author states in the argument that may not be true. Is the statement about Flaw questions true or false?
FALSE QUEST. ASSUMP NO = PREMISE MENTIONED IN ARG QUEST. ASSUMP = UNSTATED PREMISES WHAT AUT NEVER SAYS OUT LOUD BUT BELIEVES TO BE TRUE
Because the flaw in an argument will always be a problem with the conclusion, understanding the argument's premises isn't terribly important. Is the statement about Flaw questions true or false? If false, describe importance of ID premise in flaw questions.
FALSE, BUT: The first part of this statement is true: the flaw in an argument will always be a problem with the conclusion. But even so, it's still very important to understand an argument's premises. The premises will help you identify why the argument is flawed. They give you the information in the argument that is provided, so you can begin to think about the information that is not provided. They can also help you identify which argumentative strategy is being employed, many of which are closely related to a common fallacy and can help you spot that fallacy. And knowing which statements are premises allows you to eliminate the answer choices that attempt to cast doubt on those premises.
Multiple Choice: Select one correct answer. Recently, a report commissioned by a confectioners trade association noted that chocolate, formerly considered a health scourge, is an effective antioxidant and so has health benefits. Another earlier claim was that oily foods clog arteries, leading to heart disease, yet reports now state that olive oil has a positive influence on the circulatory system. From these examples, it is clear that if you wait long enough, almost any food will be reported to be healthful. The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument A relies on the truth of a claim by a source that is likely to be biased B applies a general rule to specific cases to which it does not pertain C bases an overly broad generalization on just a few instances D takes for granted that all results of nutritional research are eventually reported E fails to consider that there are many foods that are reported to be unhealthful
SAMPLING FALLACY
Several legislators claim that the public finds many current movies so violent as to be morally offensive. However, these legislators have misrepresented public opinion. In a survey conducted by a movie industry guild, only 17 percent of respondents thought that movies are overly violent, and only 3 percent found any recent movie morally offensive. These low percentages are telling, because the respondents see far more current movies thandoes the average moviegoer. Why is this a flawed use of a survey? A The survey was conducted by a movie industry guild, so any data it gathers is tainted by bias and any results drawn from it are inaccurate. B The survey uses individuals' subjective opinions to draw conclusions about objective facts. C The data acquired in the survey are unrelated to conclusion drawn about those survey results. D The respondents probably do not represent the public's opinion.
SAMPLING FALLACY
Several legislators claim that the public finds many current movies so violent as to be morally offensive. However, these legislators have misrepresented public opinion. In a survey conducted by a movie industry guild, only 17 percent of respondents thought that movies are overly violent, and only 3 percent found any recent movie morally offensive. These low percentages are telling, because the respondents see far more current movies thandoes the average moviegoer. The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument A attempts to undermine the legislators' credibilityinstead of addressing their argument B bases its conclusion on subjective judgments rather than on an objective criterion of moral offensiveness C fails to consider the possibility that violent moviesincrease the prevalence of antisocial behavior D generalizes from a sample that is unlikely to berepresentative of public sentiment E presumes, without providing justification, that the people surveyed based their responses on a random sampling of movies
SAMPLING FALLACY
Supervisor: Our next budget proposal will probably be approved, because normally about half of all budget proposals that the vice president considers are approved, and our last five budget proposals have all been turned down. The supervisor's reasoning is flawed because it presumes, without giving warrant, that A the last five budget proposals' having been turned down guarantees that the next five budget proposals will be approved B the vice president is required to approve at least half of all budget proposals submitted C having the last five budget proposals turned down affects the likelihood that the next budget proposal will be turned down D the majority of the last five budget proposals deserved to be turned down E the likelihood that a budget proposal will be approved is influenced by the amount of money that budget proposal requests
TEMPORAL FALLACY
Just identifying the common fallacy committed is not always sufficient to get the answer correct. Is the statement about Flaw questions true or false?
While identifying the common fallacy committed by the argument is a very helpful tool, it's not always sufficient. We want to think of the common fallacies as jumping-off points — the issues we should always think about, since they are so frequently present in arguments. But we also want to make sure we understand how that issue specifically functions in the argument in the stimulus. That's because many answer choices won't reference the name of the common fallacy, but might instead discuss how precisely that common fallacy appears in the argument.)
Knowledge of an ancient language is essential for reading original ancient documents. Most ancient historical documents, however, have been translated into modern languages, so scholars of ancient history can read them for their research without learning ancient languages. Therefore, aspirants to careers as ancient-history scholars no longer need to take the time to learn ancient languages. The argument is vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds? A It concludes that something is never necessary on the grounds that it is not always necessary. B A statement of fact is treated as if it were merely a statement of opinion. C The conclusion is no more than a restatement of the evidence provided as support of that conclusion. D The judgment of experts is applied to a matter in which their expertise is irrelevant. E Some of the evidence presented in support of the conclusion is inconsistent with other evidence provided.
logical force fallacy
Columnist: Several recent studies show, and insurance statistics confirm, that more pedestrians are killed every year in North American cities when crossing with the light than when crossing against it. Crossing against the light in North American cities is therefore less dangerous than crossing with the light. The columnist's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it A relies on sources that are likely to be biased in their reporting B presumes, without providing justification, that because two things are correlated there must be a causal relationship between them C does not adequately consider the possibility that a correlation between two events may be explained by a common cause D ignores the possibility that the effects of the types of actions considered might be quite different in environments other than the ones studied E ignores possible differences in the frequency of the two actions whose risk is being assessed
percentage vs amount fallacy
Hospital executive: At a recent conference on nonprofit management, several computer experts maintained that the most significant threat faced by large institutions such as universities and hospitals is unauthorized access to confidential data. In light of this testimony, we should make the protection of our clients' confidentiality our highest priority. The hospital executive's argument is most vulnerable to which one of the following objections? A The argument confuses the causes of a problem with the appropriate solutions to that problem. B The argument relies on the testimony of experts whose expertise is not shown to be sufficiently broad to support their general claim. C The argument assumes that a correlation between two phenomena is evidence that one is the cause of the other. D The argument draws a general conclusion about a group based on data about an unrepresentative sample of that group. E The argument infers that a property belonging to large institutions belongs to all institutions.
perception vs reality fallacy
In the last year, biologists have learned that there are many more species of amphibians in existence than had previously been known. This definitely undermines environmentalists' claim that pollution is eliminating many of these species every year. The reasoning in the argument above is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it involves a confusion between A kinds of things and the things that are of those kinds B a condition necessary for a phenomenon and one that is sufficient for it C a cause and an effect D a correlation between two phenomena and a causal relationship between them E changes in our knowledge of objects and changes in the objects themselves
perception vs reality fallacy
In the last year, biologists have learned that there are many more species of amphibians in existence than had previously been known. This definitely undermines environmentalists' claim that pollution is eliminating many of these species every year. Why is this a flawed argument? A It's possible that pollution is eliminating some non-amphibian species B It's possible that many amphibian species unknown to biologists have been dying due to pollution every year. C It's possible that there ways an amphibian species could be eliminated, other than pollution D It's possible the biologists have incorrectly identified certain species as amphibian
perception vs reality fallacy
Flaw questions ask you to identify a reason why the conclusion is not supported by the premises. Is the statement about Flaw questions true or false?
true. This is exactly what Flaw questions ask us to do. These questions ask us to identify flaws in the argument. And flaws are specific reasons why the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises. Typically, these reasons are "questionable assumptions" the author makes — things the author thinks are true that might not be true.
