Here's what the NOT flawed version of the stimulus would look like.
(Premise) sound theories AND successful implementation --> lower inflation rate
(Premise) [not] lower inflation rate
___________
(Good conclusion) [not] sound theories AND successful implementation
(Good conclusion with the negation distributed via De Morgan's) not sound theories OR not successful implementation
(Bad conclusion in the stimulus) not sound theories
The argument is flawed because it could be that the theories were fine, just that we sucked at implementing them.
In its abstract form, the flawed argument looks like this:
N and W --> R
/R
___________
/N
(C) matches this form perfectly.
(E) is an attractive wrong answer choice. It's mostly wrong because its logical form does not match:
N --> W and R
/R
___________
/N'
The argument for (E) being better than (C) is that (E) matches the other "mistake" in the argument.
The stimulus argument assumes that "sound" theories = "not far off the mark" theories. True, it does. But, I don't think it's wrong to assume that a "sound" theory is one that's "not far off the mark". At least it's far more reasonable an assumption than what (E) has us assume: N = N' or "equipment worth the investment" = "equipment better than old".
(C) on the other hand, assumes that "succeed in selling" = "not fail to sell". Isn't that closer to "sound" theories = "not far off the mark" theories?
Here's what the NOT flawed version of the stimulus would look like.
(Premise) sound theories AND successful implementation --> lower inflation rate
(Premise) [not] lower inflation rate
___________
(Good conclusion) [not] sound theories AND successful implementation
(Good conclusion with the negation distributed via De Morgan's) not sound theories OR not successful implementation
(Bad conclusion in the stimulus) not sound theories
The argument is flawed because it could be that the theories were fine, just that we sucked at implementing them.
In its abstract form, the flawed argument looks like this:
N and W --> R
/R
___________
/N
(C) matches this form perfectly.
(E) is an attractive wrong answer choice. It's mostly wrong because its logical form does not match:
N --> W and R
/R
___________
/N'
The argument for (E) being better than (C) is that (E) matches the other "mistake" in the argument.
The stimulus argument assumes that "sound" theories = "not far off the mark" theories. True, it does. But, I don't think it's wrong to assume that a "sound" theory is one that's "not far off the mark". At least it's far more reasonable an assumption than what (E) has us assume: N = N' or "equipment worth the investment" = "equipment better than old".
(C) on the other hand, assumes that "succeed in selling" = "not fail to sell". Isn't that closer to "sound" theories = "not far off the mark" theories?
A
It is a hypothesis that is taken by the scientists to be conclusively proven by the findings described in the passage.
B
It is a generalization that, if true, rules out the possibility that some people who do not take penicillin develop bacteria resistant to it.
C
It is a point that, in conjunction with the fact that some patients who do not take penicillin develop penicillin-resistant bacteria, generates the problem that prompted the research described in the passage.
D
It is the tentative conclusion of previous research that appears to be falsified by the scientists’ discovery of the mechanism by which bacteria become resistant to mercury poisoning.
E
It is a generalization assumed by the scientists to conclusively prove that the explanation of their problem case must involve reference to the genetic makeup of the penicillin-resistant bacteria.
</section