Self-paced
Many people do not understand themselves, nor do they try to gain self-understanding. █████ ██████ █████ ███ ██ ██████████ ███████ ███ █████ ████████ ███ ████ ██ █████ ███████ ███████ ██████████████████ ██ ██ ██████████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ██ ██ █████ ████ ████ ████ ██████ ███ █████ ██████████████████ ████ ██ █████████ ██ █████████████ ███████
Objective: Identify a Flaw
The stimulus comes to the conclusion that if someone lacks self-understanding, they can't understand others. But what support is offered for this conclusion? Simply the same claim again, that without self-understanding, a person can't understand others.
What's worse, this restatement is the only support given in the argument. The rest of the stimulus broadly discusses self-understanding, but doesn't say anything more to justify the idea that self-understanding is necessary to understand others. So the argument's conclusion is just a restatement of its premise: the stimulus commits circular reasoning.
2.
The reasoning in the argument ██ ██████ ███████ ███ ████████
a
mistakes something that ██ █████████ ██ █████ █████ █ █████████ ███ █████████ ████ ██ ██████ ██ ██████ ██ █████ █████ ████ █████████
The stimulus only makes a single conditional claim: that
b
fails to take ████ ███████ ███ ███████████ ████ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ████ █ ████████ █████████████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████
The argument's conclusion is about self-understanding being a necessary condition for understanding others. Whether people want to understand themselves doesn't affect that conclusion, so even if that possibility is overlooked, that wouldn't be a flaw.
c
blames people for █████████ ███ █████ ████ ██████ ████████████ ██ ████ ███████████
The argument doesn't make any accusations of blame. Because (C) doesn't accurately describe the argument, it can't be the correct flaw.
d
makes use of ███ ██████████ █████ ████ ████████████████████████ ███████ ████████ ████ ████
The argument doesn't specifically define self-understanding, but that's fine, because the way that term is used isn't vague. It's simply used to mean a person's understanding of themself.
e
draws a conclusion ████ ██████ ████████ █ █████ █████ ██ ███████ ██ ████ ██████████
The argument concludes that