Self-study
Support It is impossible to do science without measuring. ██ ██ ██████████ ██ ███████ ███████ ██████ █████ ████████ █████ ██ ████████████ ██████ ███████ ██ ██████████ █████ ███ █████████ ██ █ ████ ██ ████████████████████████ █████ ███████ ████ █████ ██████ ██████████
Method of Reasoning
The argument reasons that because X (doing science) requires Y (measuring), and Y (measuring) requires Z (selecting units of measurement), a feature of Z (being arbitrary) also applies to X (doing science). This is flawed, because although we can conclude that X (doing science) requires something (selecting units of measurement) that has a feature (arbitrariness), that doesn’t mean the feature (arbitrariness) directly applies to X (doing science).
18.
The pattern of reasoning in █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ████ ███████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ██████
a
Long hours of ████████ ███ █████████ ███ ██████████ ███████ ██████ ███ ████ ███████ █████ ███████ █████ ██ █████ ██ ███████ █████████ ██████ ███ ████ █████ ██ ████████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ █████████ █████ ██ ████████
This reasons that because X (perform difficult music) requires Y (develop musical skill), and Y requires Z (long hours of practice), a feature of Z (being tedious) must also apply to X (perform difficult music). This is flawed because X doesn’t have to have the feature (being tedious) even if it requires something that has the feature.
b
You have to █████████ ██ ███ ██ █████████ █████████ ███ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ██████ ██ ██ █████████ ██ ███ █ █████████
This isn’t parallel, because the conclusion doesn’t assert that it is expensive to run an expanding business. There’s a difference between an expanding business and businesses generally. The argument in the stimulus didn’t involve this shift in the subject of the conclusion.
c
It is permissible ██ ███ ██ ███ ████ ████████ ██ ███ ██ ███ ████ ███████ ███ ████ ████ ██ █████ ███ ███ ██ ████ ██ ████ ██ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ██ ██ ███████████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ██████
This doesn’t involve a claim that X requires Y, which requires Z. Rather, although we get one claim about what’s required, we get another claim about what’s “permissible,” which isn’t a statement about what’s required.
d
It is impossible ██ ██ █ ███████ ███████ ██████████ ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███████████ ███████████ █████ ██████ ██████ ████████ ███████ ████ ██████ █████ █████████ █████████████
This doesn’t match, because although we get claims that X (being manager) requires Y (evaluating people), which requires Z (being subjective), the argument doesn’t try to apply a feature of Z to X. Rather, a premise tells us that people resent “being evaluated subjectively,” which is a claim that combines Y (evaluating people) and Z (being subjective). We’re looking for a premise that tells us something about Z, not about the combination of Y and Z.
e
Some farming on ███ ██████ ████████ ███████████ ████ ██████████ ███ ████ █████ ██████ ████ █████████ ███ ████████ ████ ███████ ████████ ███ █████████ ███████ ████ ██████████ ███████ █████ █████ █ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ████ ████ ██ ██ █████ ██ █████ ███ ████ ███████ ██ ████████ █████████████
(E) doesn’t involve a claim that X requires Y, which requires Z. In addition, the argument doesn’t try to apply a feature of Z directly to X.