Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumFlaw in the Reasoning

Management Consultant: Any organization that achieves long-term market dominance must have continuously invested in research and development. VestraTech Industries has recently committed a substantial portion of its annual budget to continuous research and development. We can conclude, therefore, that VestraTech Industries is guaranteed to achieve long-term market dominance.

Which of the following best describes the flaw in the management consultant's reasoning?

  1. treats a condition that is required for bringing about a certain outcome as though it were sufficient to guarantee that outcomeAnswer
  2. B
    assumes a causal relationship between two events based merely on the observation that they often occur together
  3. C
    relies on an ambiguous shift in the meaning of the phrase 'market dominance' between the premises and the conclusion
  4. D
    fails to distinguish between a subsidiary conclusion and the argument's overall main conclusion
  5. E
    attempts to establish its conclusion by contradicting one of its own stated premises

Answer

The argument treats a condition that is required for bringing about a certain outcome as though it were sufficient to guarantee that outcome.
The correct answer accurately identifies the structural flaw of confusing necessary and sufficient conditions. The first premise establishes that continuous R&D is a requirement (a necessary condition) for long-term market dominance. The argument then incorrectly assumes that because VestraTech satisfied this requirement, it is absolutely guaranteed to achieve market dominance, treating the requirement as if it were a sufficient guarantee.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first premise to identify the conditional relationship.
Market Dominance -> Continuous R&D. (R&D is a necessary condition for dominance).
Understanding the precise logical constraints set by the word 'must' is crucial for evaluating the argument.
2
Analyze the second premise and how it applies to VestraTech.
VestraTech has continuous R&D. (The necessary condition has been met).
This establishes the factual basis from which the author attempts to draw an inference.
3
Examine the conclusion drawn from these premises.
VestraTech -> Market Dominance. (Therefore, VestraTech will achieve dominance).
To find the flaw, we must see how the author moved from the premises to the final claim.
4
Compare the logical structure to known logical fallacies.
The author committed an illegal reversal, confusing a necessary condition for a sufficient one.
Fulfilling a requirement (R&D) does not automatically guarantee success (Dominance), as there may be other unstated requirements.

Key Concept

Flaw in the Reasoning: Necessary vs. Sufficient Conditions
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Flaw in the Reasoning

More questions from this topic