Letter to the editor: Recently, the city council passed an ordinance that prohibits loitering at the local shopping mall. ███ █████████ ████████ ████ ███ ██ █████████ ████████████ ███ █████████ ██████████ ███████████ ███████ █████████ ███ ██████ ████████ ███ █████████ ███ ███████████████ ██████ ███ ███████ █████ ███████ ████████ ████████████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███ ██████ █████ ██ ████ ████████ ███████ ████ ████ █████ ████████████ ███ █████████ █████ ███ ██████████ █████
The letter concludes that the stated goals of the recent ordinance (reducing overcrowding and congestion) aren’t its actual goals. As support, the author of the letter says that the ordinance won’t accomplish these goals.
The author of the letter assumes that the only goals of an action are those that will be achieved. This relationship between goals and achievement isn’t supported elsewhere in the argument, so there is no reason to make this assumption.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ █ ████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██████████
The argument ignores ███ ███████████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███████ ███ █████████ █████ ████ ██ ██ ████ ███ ███████ ███ ███████ ██████
This possibility is not relevant to the argument. The argument claims that the declared goals (eliminating overcrowding and alleviating congestion) of the ordinance can’t be the actual goals; secondary goals are irrelevant to the discussion of whether the stated goals are the actual goals.
The argument takes ███ ███████ ████ █████████ ██████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ██ ██████ █████████ ██████ ███ ██████ ████ ██ ████ ███████ ████ █████
This is the flaw. The argument erroneously assumes that the only goals of an action are those that will be achieved; there is no support for this assumption. It is possible to have goals and not meet them, but the argument ignores this possibility.
The argument dismisses █ █████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ██████ ████ ███████ ██ ███ ████████
This is descriptively inaccurate; the argument does not attack the source of the claim (which in this case would be the city council).
The argument takes ███ ███████ ████ ██ ██████ ████ ████ ███ ██████████ ███ ██████ █████ ████ ███ ████ ███ ██████████ ████████
The argument is entirely about whether the stated goal of an action is the action’s actual goal; other beneficial effects are outside the scope of the argument.
The argument treats █ █████████ ████ ██ █████████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████ ██████ █████ ██ ██ ████ █████████ ████ ██████████ ███ █████████ █████ ██████
This is descriptively inaccurate. (E) describes confusing the sufficient and necessary conditions, which does not occur in this argument.
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnostic