Self-study
Support In a test of fuel efficiency, car X and car Y yielded the same average fuel mileage, even though Support car X was driven in a less fuel-efficient manner than car Y was. █████ ███ █ ██ ████ ████ █████████ ████ ███ ██
Method of Reasoning
The argument presents a similarity between two things (cars X and Y having similar fuel efficiencies during a test). It then presents an external difference not reflected in this similarity (car X being driven in a less fuel-efficient manner), to validly conclude that the two things have a difference (different fuel efficiencies).
10.
Which one of the following █████████ ██ ████ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██████
a
In an experiment, ███████ █ ████████████ ████ █████ ████ ███████ ██ ████████ ██ █████████ ████ ███████ █ ████ ██████████ ██ ██ ██████████ ██ ████████ ████ ████████ █ ███ █ ██████████ ████ ████████████
Mismatched premises. (A) presents a difference between two things (different pain ratings between two subjects) to conclude that they have a difference. The stimulus, meanwhile, presents a similarity between two things, then an external difference that wasn’t accounted for, so (A) doesn’t match.
b
Our hamster gained ███ ████ ██████ ██ ██████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████████ ████ ██████ ███ ███████ ███ ████ ████ ███████ ██ ██ ████ ██ ████ ███ ███████ ██████ ████ ████████ ████ ██████ ████
(B) presents a similarity between two things (two hamsters gaining the same amount of weight). It then presents an external difference not reflected in this similarity (one hamster eating more), to validly conclude that the two things have a difference (one hamster burns more calories).
c
When on his ████████ ██████ █████ ██████ ████ ████████ ████ █ ████ ████ ████████ ██ █ ██████████ █████ ██ ██ █████ ████ ████ ██████ ████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ██ ████ ██ █████ ██████ ████ ██████
Mismatched premises and conclusion. (C) presents a difference between two things (Roland going faster coasting downhill than pedaling horizontally), then concludes that this difference could be made even bigger. The stimulus, meanwhile, presents a similarity between two things, then a conclusion highlighting a difference, so (C) doesn’t match.
d
When asked to █████ ███ █████ ██ ███████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██████████ █ ████ █████ █████████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ████ ██ ██ █████ █████ █████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ████ █████████ █ ████ ████ █████████████ ███ ███████ ██████
Mismatched premises. (D) presents a difference between two things (two people judging antique values differently) to reach its conclusion. The stimulus, meanwhile, presents a similarity between two things to reach its conclusion, so (D) doesn’t match.
e
Jean demonstrates a ████ █████ ██ ██████ ██████ ████ ███ █████ ████████████ ████████ █████ ██ ████ ██ ████ ███████ █████ ████████████ ████████ ███ █████ ███████████ █ █████ █████ ██ ██████ ███████
Mismatched premises and conclusion. (E) gives us a single fact (Jean sees wells with glasses) to invalidly reach a conditional conclusion (if she didn’t have glasses, she wouldn’t be able to see as well). The stimulus, meanwhile, presents a similarity between two things, then a conclusion highlighting a difference, so (E) doesn’t match.