Examkin

Question

Difficulty: EasyFlaw in the Reasoning

Botanist: In order for this rare species of orchid to bloom, it must be kept in an environment with high humidity. The greenhouse housing this specimen has maintained high humidity throughout the entire year. Therefore, this orchid will bloom.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the reasoning flaw in the botanist's argument?

  1. A
    generalizes about all plant species based on observations of a single rare orchid
  2. B
    rejects the possibility that the greenhouse humidity levels were measured inaccurately
  3. assumes that satisfying a prerequisite for blooming is enough to ensure that the orchid will bloomAnswer
  4. D
    relies on a premise that claims high humidity is never harmful to other greenhouse plants
  5. E
    mistakes the observation regarding the humidity level for the main conclusion of the argument

Answer

The argument assumes that satisfying a prerequisite for blooming is enough to ensure that the orchid will bloom.
The botanist states that high humidity is a necessary condition ('in order for... it must be...'). However, satisfying a necessary condition does not guarantee the outcome. The author commits a classic error of conditional logic by treating a necessary condition as though it were sufficient to guarantee that the orchid will bloom.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument
Premise 1: High humidity is required for the orchid to bloom (Blooming -> High Humidity). Premise 2: High humidity is present. Conclusion: The orchid will bloom.
Deconstructing the argument into formal components isolates the structural relationship between conditions.
2
Analyze the logical transition between premises and conclusion
The author affirms the necessary condition (humidity) and attempts to deduce that the sufficient condition (blooming) must occur.
Meeting a necessary requirement does not guarantee an outcome, because other necessary factors (e.g., proper sunlight, soil nutrients, temperature) might still be lacking.
3
Match the identified flaw with the correct description
The argument confuses a necessary condition (a prerequisite) with a sufficient condition (a guarantee).
Accurately identifying the formal logical fallacy resolves the question.

Key Concept

Mistaking a Necessary Condition for a Sufficient Condition
Estimated Time:50s
Rate this question

Topics

Flaw in the Reasoning

More questions from this topic