Self-study
Support Decreased reliance on fossil fuels is required if global warming is to be halted. ███ ███████ ████████ █████ ████████ ██ ████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ███████████ ██████ ███████ ████ ████████ ██ ██████ ██████ ███████ ████████ ████████ ████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ███████████ ██████ ████████
Method of Reasoning
The argument starts by describing something necessary (decreased fossil fuel reliance) to halt a problem (global warming). It then describes one approach (offering economic incentives to develop alternative energy sources) to achieving that necessity (decreased fossil fuel reliance) and concludes that the approach (offering economic incentives to develop alternative energy sources) is required to halt that problem (global warming).
Identify and Describe Flaw
This argument is flawed because it treats one approach to achieving something as a necessary approach to achieving that thing. We know that to halt global warming, we must decrease reliance on fossil fuels. Offering economic incentives to develop alternative energy sources may be one approach to decreasing reliance on fossil fuels, but we can’t infer that it’s required that we take that approach to decrease reliance on fossil fuels. It may be possible to decrease reliance on fossil fuels without offering economic incentives to develop alternative energy and, therefore, offering those economic incentives may not be required to halt global warming.
26.
The flawed pattern of reasoning █████████ ██ ███ ████████ █████ ████ ███████ █████████ ████ █████████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ███ ██████████
a
If we end ███████ ██ ████ ███ ███████ ██████ ████████████ ████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████ ████████████ ████ ███ ███████
No flaw. Ending unemployment will end poverty, and ending poverty will end hunger. So ending unemployment will end hunger.
b
Daily exercise guarantees ████ ███████ ████ ██████ ███████ █ █████ █████ ██ █████ ████████ ██ ████████ ███ ████ ███████
Wrong flaw. (B) is flawed because it commits a cookie-cutter “confusing necessary and sufficient conditions flaw.” Daily exercise guarantees good health, so having good health is a necessary condition of daily exercise. But we can’t infer that daily exercise is required for good health. Attempting to make that inference is confusing sufficiency for necessity. The stimulus, meanwhile, doesn’t commit a “confusing necessary and sufficient conditions” flaw.
c
Going to college ██ ████████ ███ ███████ █ ████████████ ████ ██████████ ████ ████ ██████ ██ █████████ ███ █████ ██ ████████ ██ ██████████ ████ ████ ██████ ██ █████████ ███ ███████ █ ████████████ ████
No flaw. Getting a professional job requires going to college, and going to college requires graduating from high school. So we can infer that graduating from high school is necessary for getting a professional job.
d
Keeping good teachers ██ █████████ ███ █████████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ████████ ████ █████████ ████ ████████ █████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ ██ ████████ ██ █████████ ████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███████ ██████████
The argument starts by describing something necessary (keeping good teachers) to improve education. It then describes one approach (improved salaries of teachers) to achieving that necessity (keeping good teachers) and concludes that the approach (improved salaries of teachers) is required to improve education. This commits the same flaw as the stimulus of treating one approach to achieving something as a necessary approach to achieving that thing. Just because we must keep good teachers to improve education, and increasing the salaries of teachers is a way to keep good teachers, that doesn’t imply that we must increase teacher salaries to keep good teachers. There may be another viable approach, eliminating the need for increased teacher salaries.
e
Preventing abuse of ████████████ █████ ████████ █████████ ████ █████████ ████████ █████████ ███████████ ███████ ███████ ███ ███ ███████████ ████████ ██ ██████ ██ ████ █████████ ███████ ███ ██ ██ █████████ ███ ██ ███████████ ███████ ███ ███████████ ███ ███████ ██████████ ███ █████ ██ ████████████ █████ ████ ██ ██████████
Wrong flaw. (E) erroneously concludes that increasing a necessary condition (cooperation between law enforcement and schools) of a sufficient condition (preventing abuse of prescription drugs) will ensure the sufficient condition (preventing abuse of prescription drugs). The stimulus, meanwhile, isn’t flawed because of a faulty inference about a sufficient condition and its necessary condition.