Self-study
Last year, a software company held a contest to generate ideas for their new logo. █████████ ██ ███ ██████ ████████ ███ ███████ ███ ███████ █████ ███████ ███████ ███████ █████████ █ ███████ ████ ███ █████████ ███ █████ ████ ███ █ ███████ ████ ███ █████████ ███ █████ ██ ██ ████ ████ ███████ ███ ████████
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that Juan must have entered the logo-generation contest. The author supports this conclusion with the following:
One of the rules stated that everyone who entered the contest would receive a T-shirt with the company’s logo.
Juan has a T-shirt with the company’s logo.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author confuses a sufficient condition with a necessary condition. Entrance into the contest is sufficient to get the T-shirt. But that doesn’t mean it’s necessary. Maybe some people could have gotten the T-shirt without entering the contest.
16.
The reasoning in the argument ██ ██████ ██ ████ ███ ████████
a
infers a causal ████████████ ████ ███ ████████ ████ ████████ █ ███████████
The argument doesn’t conclude or assume a causal relationship. The argument’s based on application of a conditional rule.
b
takes a condition ████ ██ ██████████ ███ █ ██████████ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ██ █████████ ███ ████ ███████
The contest rules tell us that entrance into the contest is sufficient for the outcome of getting a T-shirt with the logo. But that doesn’t imply entrance into the contest is necessary for the T-shirt. So the fact Juan has the T-shirt doesn’t prove that he entered the contest.
c
infers that every ██████ ██ █ █████ ███ █ ███████ ██ ██████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ███ █████ ██ █ █████ ███ ████ ███████
The argument doesn’t commit a whole-to-part fallacy. The evidence concerns a rule of the contest and Juan. The conclusion is based on an attempt to apply that rule to Juan. The author doesn’t conclude or assume anything about every member of a group.
d
has a premise ████ ███████████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ██████████
(D) describes circular reasoning. The author’s conclusion — that Juan entered the contest — is not restated in the premises.
e
constructs a generalization ██ ███ █████ ██ █ ██████ ████████
The argument doesn’t generalize based on a single instance. The argument tries to apply a conditional rule to Juan. The argument doesn’t conclude or assume anything about a broader group.