Self-study
Questions have arisen regarding the accuracy of the reports the university’s archaeological museum issues on its sales and acquisitions for the year. ██ █████████ ████████████ ████ ████████ ██████ ██ █████ ████████ ██ █████ ██████████████ ████ █████ █████████████ █████ █████ ██████████████ ████ ██ █████ ████ ██████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ █████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ ████ ████ ██ ████ ██ █████████ ███████ ██ ██ ██████ █████████
Objective: Identify a Flaw
The argument tells us about am archaeological museum, whose annual reports of sales and acquisitions have been questioned regarding their accuracy. The argument concludes that a team of external archaeologists will be able to tell if this year's report is accurate in their review. In support, the argument explains that the review team will have access to all the documents used in the report.
The issue is, there's no guarantee that those documents will be accurate. Sure, the report could be inaccurate if it misrepresents the original documentation, but maybe the documentation itself is inaccurate. If that's the case, then access to the documents wouldn't actually be enough for the review team to determine whether the report is accurate.
5.
The reasoning in the argument ██ ██████ ███████ ███ ████████
a
does not specify ███████ ███ █████████ ████ ████ ██████ ██ ████ █████ ███████ ████ ████ ████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██████████ ███ ████ █████
The museum's report only concerns sales and acquisitions. As far as we know, long-standing museum pieces are outside the scope of the report, and therefore the argument.
b
provides no information █████████ ███ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████████ ██████████ ██████████
Whether the museum's annual report is accurate is unrelated to the features of its collection. A lack of information about the collection's size and quality doesn't affect the argument.
c
omits any mention ██ ███████ ███ ██████████ ██████████ ██ ██ ███████ ██ ██ █████████ ████ ██ ███████████
As with (B), the features of the museum's collection—including who can access it—don't make a difference to whether the review team will really be able to assess the report's accuracy.
d
ignores the possibility ████ █████ █████ ████ ████ ████ █████ ██ ████████████ ██████ ███ ████ ████ ████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ █████ ███ ██████ ███ █████
(D) identifies the issue that the documents themselves might be inaccurate. If that's the case, having access to the documents wouldn't actually allow the review team to determine whether the resulting report is accurate.
e
does not describe ████ ████ █████ ██ ███ █████████ ████████ █████████████ ███████ ███ ██████ ███ ███ █████████ ██ █████ ██ ███ █████
The question in the argument is just whether the review team will be able to tell if the report is accurate. What they plan to do after that point doesn't make a difference to whether their judgment will be reliable.