Self-study
Support Only experienced salespeople will be able to meet the company's selling quota. █████ █ ████ ███ █████ ██ ██ ███████████ ████████████ █████ █ ████ ██ ████ ██ ████ ████ ████ ███ ██████
Method of Reasoning
The author establishes a conditional relationship (if a salesperson meets the quota, then they’re experienced). They then conclude that their failure to meet the sufficient condition (not meeting the quota) means they don’t meet the necessary condition (they’re not an experienced salesperson).
Identify and Describe Flaw
This argument features the cookie-cutter flaw of confusing a sufficient condition for a necessary condition. It’s still entirely possible to have the necessary condition (being an experienced salesperson) without having the sufficient condition (meeting the quota), so the absence of the sufficient condition doesn’t support any conclusions.
20.
The pattern of flawed reasoning █████████ ██ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ████ ███████ ██ ████ █████████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ███ ██████████
a
Only on Fridays ███ █████████ ███████ ██ █████ █████████ █████ ██ ██████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ █████████ ██ ██ ████ ███ ██ █████ ██ █████
Wrong flaw. (A) sets up a conditional relationship (if allowed to dress casually, then it’s Friday), but it brings up the new variable of Hector dressing formally. How Hector is dressed has no bearing on whether he is allowed to dress casually, so the conclusion doesn’t follow. The stimulus, meanwhile, concludes that the absence of a sufficient condition leads to the absence of a necessary condition, so (A) doesn’t match.
b
Only music lovers ████ ████ ██████ █████ █████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ████ ███ ████ ██████
(B) establishes a conditional relationship: If you take the class, then you’re a music lover. It then concludes that Hillary’s failure to meet the sufficient condition (not taking the class) means that she doesn’t meet the necessary condition (she’s not a music lover). The stimulus also concludes that the absence of a sufficient condition leads to the absence of a necessary condition, so (B) matches.
c
Only oceanographers enjoy ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ████ ██████ ████ ███ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ █████ ██ ██ ███ ██ ██████████████
No flaw. (C) establishes a conditional relationship (if you enjoy the Atlantic in midwinter, then you’re an oceanographer) and validly concludes that the absence of the necessary condition leads to the absence of the sufficient condition. The stimulus, meanwhile, concludes that the absence of a sufficient condition leads to the absence of a necessary condition, so (C) doesn’t match.
d
As this tree ██████ ██ ██ █ █████ ████████ ██ ███████ ████ ██ ████ ██ ██ █ ████████ █████████ █████ ██ ██ ████ ██ ████████ █████████ ████ ███ █████ █████ █████████
No flaw. (D) establishes a conditional relationship (if giant redwood, then northern latitude) and correctly concludes that the sufficient condition leads to the necessary condition. The stimulus, meanwhile, concludes that the absence of a sufficient condition leads to the absence of a necessary condition, so (D) doesn’t match.
e
Only accomplished mountain ████████ ███ █████ ██ ████████ █████ ████████ ████ ██ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████████ █████ ███ ██ ██ ████████████ ████████ ████████
Wrong flaw. (E) establishes a conditional relationship (if can scale El Capitan, then accomplished climber) but invalidly concludes that the necessary condition (accomplished climber) leads to the sufficient condition (can scale El Capitan). The stimulus, meanwhile, concludes that the absence of a sufficient condition leads to the absence of a necessary condition, so (E) doesn’t match.