Self-study
Support Gecko lizards are found in any environment where there is an abundant population of gnats. █████ ███ ███████ ████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████ █████ ███ ██ █████ ███████ ██████ █████ █████ ████ ███ ██ ██ ████████ ██████████ ██ █████ █████ █████████████ ███ ███████ ████ ████ ███ ██ ████
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the climate in this area is not wet. This is based on the following:
Abundant population of gnats → geckos found
Gnats → wet climate
There are no geckos in this area.
There isn’t an abundant population of gnats in this area.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author confuses sufficient and necessary conditions in this statement: “Gnats can survive only in wet climates.” This establishes that having gnats present is sufficient to know that the climate is wet. But the author mistakenly believes that this implies the absence of an abundance of gnats proves that the climate is not wet. This overlooks the possibility that a climate can be wet even if there are aren’t many gnats present.
9.
The reasoning in the argument ██ ██████ ██ ████ ██
a
presumes, without providing ██████████████ ████ █████ ███████ ███ ███████ ████ ██ ████████████ ████ ████████ ████ ███████████
The author does not assume gnats are necessary for geckos. Rather, the author correctly uses the premise that asserts the presence of geckos is necessary for abundance of gnats. We know there are no geckos in the area, so that proves there isn’t an abundance of gnats.
b
presumes, without providing ██████████████ ████ ███ ███ ████████████ ███████ ████████ ███████████ ██ █████
The author assumes that if the climate in an area is wet, there will be an abundance of gnats. This is why the author believes the lack of abundance of gnats implies that a climate is not wet. This is flawed, because no premise tells us all wet climate areas have lots of gnats.
c
does not consider ███████ █████ ███████████ ██ █████ ███ ███████ ██ ████████ ████ ███ ███ ███
A premise establishes that gnats can survive only in wet climates. So if an area is not wet, gnats cannot survive there.
d
does not mention ███████ █████ ███████ ███ ████████ ███████ █████
The author didn’t need to mentions whether geckos eat other things. In fact, it’s not even clear whether geckos eat gnats. What’s in a geckos diet doesn’t affect the logic of the argument.
e
fails to establish ████ ████ █████ ███████ █████ ███ ███████ ██ █ ███ ███████ ██████████ ████ █ █████ ██████████ ██ █████
We already have a premise asserting that there are no geckos living in the area. So the author doesn’t need to establish that it’s impossible for geckos to live in certain areas. We already know geckos don’t live in this area, and the argument is about this area.