Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardParallel Flaw

Chef: To bake a flawless soufflé, a baker must use room-temperature eggs and precisely fold the egg whites into the batter. Marcus precisely folded the egg whites into his batter. Therefore, if Marcus fails to bake a flawless soufflé, it must be because he did not use room-temperature eggs.

Which one of the following arguments exhibits a flawed pattern of reasoning most similar to that in the chef's argument?

  1. A
    Marketer: A successful advertising campaign must feature a memorable slogan and a clear call to action. The new campaign features both a memorable slogan and a clear call to action. Therefore, the new campaign will undoubtedly be successful.
  2. B
    Mechanic: For a car engine to run smoothly, its spark plugs must be clean and its fuel injector must be functioning properly. This car's engine is not running smoothly. Therefore, its spark plugs must not be clean and its fuel injector must not be functioning properly.
  3. Botanist: For a desert orchid to bloom, it must receive ample direct sunlight and be planted in well-draining soil. This particular desert orchid is planted in well-draining soil. Hence, if it fails to bloom, it must be because it is not receiving ample direct sunlight.Answer
  4. D
    Baker: To bake a flawless soufflé, a baker must use room-temperature eggs and precisely fold the egg whites into the batter. Sarah used room-temperature eggs but failed to precisely fold the egg whites into her batter. Therefore, Sarah will fail to bake a flawless soufflé.
  5. E
    Advisor: To be eligible for the academic scholarship, a student must have a high GPA or extensive volunteer experience. John has a high GPA. Therefore, if John is deemed ineligible for the scholarship, it must be because he lacks extensive volunteer experience.

Answer

The argument about the botanist and the desert orchid exhibits the exact same flawed pattern of reasoning.
The correct answer exactly mirrors the highly specific, flawed logical structure of the stimulus. The stimulus establishes two necessary conditions for a goal (room-temperature eggs and precise folding for a flawless soufflé). It then states that one condition is met, and concludes that if the goal fails, it must be due to the absence of the other stated condition. This is flawed because it ignores the possibility of other unstated necessary conditions causing the failure (e.g., wrong oven temperature). Similarly, the correct answer establishes two necessary conditions for a goal (sunlight and well-draining soil for an orchid to bloom). It states that one condition is met (soil), and falsely concludes that if the goal fails (no bloom), it must be due to the absence of the other stated condition (sunlight), ignoring other possible causes for failure.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the logical structure of the stimulus argument.
Structure: Goal (flawless soufflé) -> Necessary Condition 1 (room-temp eggs) AND Necessary Condition 2 (precisely fold).
Identifying the formal conditional logic is the first step in parallel reasoning.
2
Identify how the premises are applied to the specific case in the stimulus.
The argument states that Marcus met Necessary Condition 2 (precisely folded).
We must map the specific scenario to the abstract structure.
3
Analyze the conclusion to identify the exact logical flaw.
Conclusion: If Goal fails (Not Goal), it must be because of Not Necessary Condition 1. The flaw is assuming the stated necessary conditions are exhaustive. The soufflé could fail for an unstated reason (e.g., incorrect oven temperature) despite having room-temperature eggs.
Understanding the precise nature of the error is required to find its parallel.
4
Evaluate the answer choices for an identical structure.
The correct option states: Goal (bloom) -> N1 (sunlight) AND N2 (soil). Has N2 (soil). Concludes: If Not Goal, then Not N1. This is a perfect structural match.
The correct answer must match both the conditional premise structure and the exact flawed application in the conclusion.

Key Concept

Parallel Flaw - Assuming Stated Necessary Conditions are Exhaustive
Rate this question

Topics

Parallel Flaw

More questions from this topic