Question

Difficulty: MediumNecessary vs. Sufficient Condition Flaws

Read the following flawed argument excerpts. Pair each argument with the statement that most accurately describes its specific logical error regarding conditional reasoning.

  • All professional orchestra musicians undergo years of rigorous daily practice. Since Julian is an amateur folk guitarist rather than a professional orchestra musician, he clearly has not undergone years of rigorous daily practice.Treats a condition that ensures a certain outcome as though it is a necessary requirement for that outcome.
  • A successful bakery requires a reliable supplier for high-quality flour. The new downtown bakery has secured the region's most reliable flour supplier, so its overall success is absolutely guaranteed.Takes for granted that a condition without which a phenomenon cannot occur is all that is needed to produce that phenomenon.
  • Upgrading a factory’s ventilation system always eliminates airborne contaminants. Eliminating airborne contaminants inevitably leads to a significant decrease in employee sick days. Therefore, if a factory experiences a decrease in sick days, it must have upgraded its ventilation system.Concludes that because a specific initial action is sufficient to trigger a series of results, the occurrence of the final result proves the initial action was taken.

Answer

The correct mapping pairs the musician argument with treating an ensuring condition as a requirement (illegal negation), the bakery argument with taking a required condition as all that is needed (illegal reversal), and the factory argument with assuming the final result of a chain proves the initial action.
Each argument excerpt commits a distinct conditional reasoning flaw. The musician argument commits an illegal negation by treating a sufficient condition as a necessary one. The bakery argument commits an illegal reversal by assuming a necessary condition is sufficient. The factory argument illicitly reverses a multi-step conditional chain.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the conditional structure of the musician argument.
The premise is 'Professional -> Rigorous Practice'. The conclusion is 'Not Professional -> Not Rigorous Practice'.
Diagramming the logic reveals that the argument negates the sufficient condition to incorrectly infer the negation of the necessary condition (illegal negation).
2
Analyze the conditional structure of the bakery argument.
The premise is 'Success -> Reliable Supplier'. The conclusion is 'Reliable Supplier -> Success'.
Diagramming reveals that the argument takes a necessary requirement and illicitly treats it as a sufficient guarantee (illegal reversal).
3
Analyze the conditional structure of the factory argument.
The premise establishes a chain: 'Upgrade -> Eliminate Contaminants -> Fewer Sick Days'. The conclusion is 'Fewer Sick Days -> Upgrade'.
This demonstrates a reversed conditional chain, where the final necessary outcome is mistaken as sufficient for the initial trigger.
4
Map the identified logical flaws to their formal abstract descriptions.
The musician argument maps to the description of illegal negation, the bakery argument maps to illegal reversal, and the factory argument maps to the reversed conditional chain.
Accurate matching requires linking the specific structural flaw of each excerpt to its generalized LSAT logical definition.

Key Concept

Necessary vs. Sufficient Condition Flaws
Rate this question