Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardFlaw in the Reasoning

Architectural Historian: A historical preservation initiative is eligible to receive a municipal heritage grant only if the project concurrently stimulates local economic growth and rigorously preserves the original architectural integrity of the site. The newly proposed restoration of the Beaumont Foundry will definitively stimulate economic growth by creating three hundred permanent jobs. Furthermore, despite interior modernizations, the developers' binding agreement ensures the rigorous preservation of the foundry's original exterior architectural integrity. It follows inexorably that the Beaumont restoration will be awarded a municipal heritage grant.

Which of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the reasoning of the architectural historian's argument?

  1. A
    The argument assumes without justification that the primary purpose of the municipal heritage grant is to stimulate local economic growth rather than to preserve architectural history.
  2. B
    The argument fails to consider the possibility that the extensive interior modernizations will prevent the developers from rigorously preserving the foundry's architectural integrity.
  3. C
    The argument confuses the intermediate claim that the restoration will stimulate economic growth with the ultimate conclusion regarding the grant.
  4. The argument infers that a particular result will occur solely on the grounds that the stated prerequisites for that result have been satisfied.Answer
  5. E
    The argument takes for granted that any historical preservation initiative that fails to receive a municipal heritage grant must have also failed to stimulate local economic growth.

Answer

The correct answer identifies that the argument infers a result will occur solely because its prerequisites have been satisfied.
The argument states that a project is eligible for a grant 'only if' it meets two conditions: stimulating economic growth and preserving architectural integrity. In formal logic, these are necessary conditions. The historian then demonstrates that the Beaumont Foundry meets both of these conditions and concludes that it will 'inexorably' (definitely) be awarded the grant. This reasoning is flawed because it treats the satisfaction of necessary conditions (prerequisites) as sufficient to guarantee the outcome.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the conditional logic in the argument's first sentence.
The phrase 'only if' introduces necessary conditions. To be eligible for a grant, a project must stimulate economic growth AND preserve architectural integrity.
Identifying the formal logical structure (Sufficient -> Necessary) is critical for diagnosing the flaw.
2
Evaluate how the premises apply this conditional logic to the Beaumont Foundry.
The premises establish that the Beaumont Foundry successfully meets both necessary conditions: it stimulates growth (by creating jobs) and preserves integrity (via binding agreement).
We must track whether the argument fulfills the necessary or sufficient conditions of the established rule.
3
Analyze the conclusion and identify the logical gap.
The author concludes the project 'will be awarded' the grant. This treats the fulfillment of necessary conditions as sufficient to guarantee the outcome (Affirming the Consequent).
Locating the exact disconnect between the premises and the absolute conclusion reveals the primary vulnerability of the reasoning.
4
Select the option that accurately describes this logical gap in abstract terms.
The correct option states that the argument infers a result will occur solely because its prerequisites (necessary conditions) have been satisfied.
This precisely maps the abstract description of Necessary/Sufficient confusion to the structural error made by the architectural historian.

Key Concept

Flaw in the Reasoning: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Rate this question

Topics

Flaw in the Reasoning

More questions from this topic