Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumEvaluating Reasoning Flaws

A study of high-growth technology startups established over the past decade revealed that every company that achieved a valuation exceeding one billion dollars was co-founded by an executive with prior experience in enterprise software. Based on this finding, a venture capital analyst argued that in order to ensure a newly launched biotechnology startup achieves a billion-dollar valuation, the founding team must simply hire a former enterprise software executive.

Which of the following best describes the flaw in the venture capital analyst's reasoning?

  1. Treats a factor that was present in successful past cases as though it were a sufficient condition to guarantee future success.Answer
  2. B
    Ignores potential differences in regulatory compliance costs between biotechnology firms and enterprise software companies.
  3. C
    Assumes without justification that no biotechnology startup lacking an enterprise software executive can ever become profitable.
  4. D
    Provides additional empirical evidence that reinforces the assertion that executive leadership directly determines market valuation.
  5. E
    Relies on the unstated premise that the financial valuation metrics collected across the ten-year period were completely free of reporting bias.

Answer

The argument flaw is best described as treating a factor observed in past successful cases as a sufficient condition to guarantee future success.
The argument observes that a specific factor (having an enterprise software executive) was present in all past billion-dollar startups. However, assuming that introducing this single factor into a new company will guarantee a billion-dollar valuation mistakes a correlated or historical feature for a sufficient cause.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premise and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: All billion-dollar startups studied in the past decade had a co-founder with enterprise software experience. Conclusion: Hiring a former software executive will ensure a new biotech startup achieves a billion-dollar valuation.
Isolating the core structure reveals the logical gap between the factual evidence and the recommendation.
2
Analyze the logical gap in the inference.
Even if every successful past startup possessed this characteristic, possessing it does not guarantee success. The analyst mistakes a co-occurring trait for a sufficient condition that automatically produces the outcome.
Identifying the misuse of conditional logic (confusing necessary or correlated conditions with sufficient conditions) pins down the flaw.
3
Select the option that accurately describes this conditional logic error.
The option stating that the argument treats a factor present in past success as a sufficient condition for future success precisely captures this reasoning vulnerability.
This directly matches the identified logical flaw without bringing in irrelevant external scope.

Key Concept

Evaluating Reasoning Flaws: Confusing Necessary/Correlated Conditions with Sufficient Conditions
Rate this question

Topics

Evaluating Reasoning Flaws

More questions from this topic