Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumFlaw in the Reasoning

Archivist: In order to successfully halt the microbial degradation of fourteenth-century parchment manuscripts, an archive must maintain ambient relative humidity levels strictly between thirty and thirty-five percent. The Westfall Rare Book Repository has upgraded its climate-control system to guarantee that relative humidity remains within this exact range at all times. Therefore, the repository will successfully prevent any further microbial degradation of its fourteenth-century parchment holdings.

Which of the following most accurately describes the flaw in the archivist's reasoning?

  1. A
    attacks the personal motives of archival technicians rather than evaluating the effectiveness of the climate-control technology
  2. B
    assumes that relative humidity is the only environmental factor capable of inflicting physical damage on archival materials
  3. infers that satisfying a requirement for halting microbial degradation is sufficient to guarantee that outcomeAnswer
  4. D
    rejects the stated premise that modern climate-control systems can maintain stable atmospheric conditions
  5. E
    confuses an intermediate conclusion regarding system capability with the main objective of manuscript acquisition

Answer

The argument infers that satisfying a requirement for halting microbial degradation is sufficient to guarantee that outcome.
The correct answer accurately identifies the structural flaw in the archivist's reasoning. The archivist sets up humidity control strictly between thirty and thirty-five percent as a necessary condition ('in order to... must maintain') to halt microbial degradation. However, the archivist then concludes that meeting this single necessary condition is sufficient to ensure that degradation is completely prevented. Meeting a necessary condition does not guarantee the outcome, because other conditions (such as temperature control or eliminating pre-existing mold spores) may also be required.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premises and conclusion in the stimulus argument.
Premise 1: Halting microbial degradation requires (necessary condition) maintaining humidity at 30–35%. Premise 2: The repository ensures humidity remains at 30–35%. Conclusion: The repository will successfully prevent microbial degradation.
Isolating the structural components of the argument is required to uncover the logical disconnect between the evidence and the claim.
2
Analyze the inferential link between the premises and the conclusion to detect the logical vulnerability.
The author establishes a necessary condition and assumes that fulfilling this condition is sufficient to guarantee the desired outcome, overlooking other necessary factors such as ambient temperature, ultraviolet light exposure, or active biological contamination.
Detecting the gap reveals the classic error of confusing a necessary condition with a sufficient condition.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to identify the statement that accurately abstracts this reasoning error.
The statement identifying that the argument treats satisfying a requirement as sufficient to guarantee the outcome accurately captures the flaw.
The correct response must precisely describe the reasoning vulnerability without mischaracterizing the scope or creating unmentioned fallacies.

Key Concept

Confusion of Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Rate this question

Topics

Flaw in the Reasoning

More questions from this topic