Self-study
Politician: Support Every regulation currently being proposed by the Committee for Overseas Trade will reduce the trade deficit. ███ █████████ █████ ███████ ██ ██ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ███████████ █████ ████ ███ ████████
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that each (every single one) of the proposed regulations would help the economy. This is based on the following:
Every proposed regulation will reduce the trade deficit.
The trade deficit is so large that it weakens the economy.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the proposed regulations won’t have any effects that could harm the economy that outweigh the benefit to the economy from reducing the trade deficit. This overlooks the possibility that the net effect of the regulations could harm the economy or end up not changing the economy.
24.
The reasoning in the politician's ████████ ██ ██████ ██ ████ ███ ████████
a
takes for granted ████ ███ █████ ███████ ████ ████████ ██ ████ ██ ██ ██████ ██ █████ ██ ██████ ██
The author points out that the deficit is currently large enough to weaken the economy. But the author doesn’t assume that the deficit will grow if we don’t do anything to reduce it. The reasoning is based purely on the current deficit.
b
takes for granted ████ ███ ████ █████ ██ █████████████ ███ ███████ ██ ████████ ███ █████ ███████
The author does not assume that we must reduce the trade deficit to strengthen the economy. There can be other ways to help the economy; the author is simply asserting that the proposed regulations would have the effect of helping the economy.
c
merely appeals to ███ █████████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ███ ███ ████████ ███████████
The author does not “merely” appeal to the authority of the committee. The author does not say that we should pass the regulations because the committee recommends them. Rather, the author points to the effect the regulations have on the trade deficit.
d
fails to consider ███ ███████████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ █ ██████████ ████ ██ ██████ ██ █████ ███████
This possibility points out that even if a regulation reduces the trade deficit, it may have other effects that end up hurting the economy (ex. they might also enact tariffs or increase taxes, etc.). The net effect of a regulation might not end up helping the economy.
e
concludes that every ██████████ ██ █ ███ ████ ████ ███ ████ ███████ ██ █ ███ ██ ███████████ ██ █ █████
(E) describes a whole-to-part fallacy. But the argument gives us a premise about “every regulation” — this is about each regulation. And the conclusion is also about each regulation. So the argument doesn’t start with a statement about the whole.