Match each flawed argument excerpt on the left with the abstract description on the right that most accurately identifies its primary reasoning vulnerability.
- Urban Planner: Every neighborhood association that submitted a grant application requesting municipal bike lane funding was awarded financial support. Because the Riverside District received municipal funding for bike lanes, the Riverside neighborhood association must have submitted a formal grant application.Treats a condition that is sufficient to guarantee an outcome as though it were a necessary condition for that outcome.
- Agricultural Scientist: Soil plots treated with the experimental bio-fertilizer exhibited a substantial reduction in fungal blight incidence over a three-month trial. Therefore, applying this bio-fertilizer was clearly the direct cause of the blight reduction.Infers a causal relationship solely from an observed temporal sequence or correlation without eliminating potential confounding factors.
- Corporate Counsel: The chief financial officer recommended that our firm divest from overseas supply chains to minimize foreign exchange exposure. However, the financial officer holds personal equity in domestic logistics firms, so we should dismiss this recommendation.Directs criticism against the personal motives or financial interests of the advocate rather than evaluating the substantive merits of the claim.
- Museum Curator: Every individual antique clock in this horological exhibition functions with flawless mechanical precision. It follows that the entire clock exhibition as an integrated whole is guaranteed to operate indefinitely without experiencing operational failure.Erroneously assumes that an attribute true of each individual part of a collection must also be true of the collection as a whole.
Answer
The urban planner excerpt matches the description of treating a sufficient condition as a necessary condition; the agricultural scientist excerpt matches inferring causation from correlation; the corporate counsel excerpt matches directing criticism against the advocate's motives; and the museum curator excerpt matches assuming an attribute of each part applies to the whole.
Each excerpt exhibits a classic argumentation flaw that aligns precisely with its corresponding abstract descriptor: the urban planner confuses sufficiency with necessity; the agricultural scientist infers causation from a co-occurrence without ruling out alternative causes; the corporate counsel dismisses a substantive proposal by citing the proponent's personal financial stake; and the curator commits a composition error by projecting the property of individual clocks onto the collective whole.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Flaw in the Reasoning: Identifying formal and informal logical fallacies (conditional reversal, correlation vs. causation, source argument, and fallacy of composition).
Estimated Time:2m 0s