Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardParallel Reasoning and Parallel Flaw

Any proposal to overhaul the municipal zoning code will face opposition from the local historic preservation society if it includes provisions for high-density residential towers. The mayor's new housing initiative clearly includes provisions for high-density residential towers. However, it does not propose overhauling the municipal zoning code. Therefore, the local historic preservation society will not oppose the mayor's new housing initiative.

The flawed pattern of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of the following?

  1. A
    Any diplomatic envoy will be granted an audience with the prime minister if they represent a G20 nation. The ambassador from Aridia was granted an audience with the prime minister, but he does not represent a G20 nation. Therefore, the ambassador from Aridia must not be a diplomatic envoy.
  2. B
    Any employee who works overtime will receive a bonus if they complete the mandatory compliance training. John completed the mandatory compliance training, but he will not receive a bonus. Therefore, John must not have worked overtime.
  3. Any tax reform legislation will be vetoed by the governor if it raises the corporate tax rate. The proposed budget bill clearly raises the corporate tax rate. However, it is not tax reform legislation. Therefore, the proposed budget bill will not be vetoed by the governor.Answer
  4. D
    Any proposal to revise the municipal charter will face opposition from the local historic preservation society if it reduces funding for heritage sites. The new civic initiative is a proposal to revise the municipal charter and it reduces funding for heritage sites. Therefore, the local historic preservation society will oppose it.
  5. E
    Any commercial vehicle will be permitted on the parkway only if it weighs less than three tons and is transporting perishable goods. The new delivery truck weighs less than three tons, but it is not transporting perishable goods. Therefore, the new delivery truck will not be permitted on the parkway.

Answer

The correct answer is the option describing the tax reform legislation and the proposed budget bill.
The correct answer exactly parallels the stimulus's flawed reasoning. The stimulus establishes a compound sufficient condition (zoning overhaul AND high-density provisions) that triggers a necessary condition (opposition). It then introduces a scenario where one part of the sufficient condition is met (high-density) but the other is not (not a zoning overhaul), and fallaciously concludes the necessary condition will not occur (no opposition). This is a Mistaken Negation. The correct option mirrors this perfectly: it establishes a compound sufficient condition (tax reform legislation AND raises corporate tax rate) triggering a necessary condition (governor's veto). It introduces a scenario meeting only one condition (raises tax rate) but lacking the other (not tax reform), and incorrectly concludes the necessary condition won't occur (no veto).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the logical structure of the stimulus argument.
The stimulus states that if a proposal is a zoning overhaul (A) AND includes high-density provisions (B), it will face opposition (C). It concludes that because a new initiative has (B) but is not (A), it will not face opposition (not C).
Understanding the exact structural formula and logical flaw is required to find a parallel argument.
2
Identify the specific logical flaw in the stimulus.
The argument commits a Mistaken Negation of a compound sufficient condition. It incorrectly assumes that failing to meet one part of a sufficient condition guarantees the necessary condition will not occur.
Parallel flaw questions require matching both the formal structure and the exact type of logical error.
3
Evaluate the options to find an argument with the identical flawed structure: (A and B) -> C; has B but not A; therefore not C.
The option regarding tax reform legislation matches perfectly: if it is tax reform (A) AND raises corporate tax (B), it will be vetoed (C). The budget bill has (B) but not (A), concluding it will not be vetoed (not C).
Only this option replicates the exact compound conditional structure and the specific mistaken negation flaw.

Key Concept

Parallel Reasoning and Parallel Flaw
Rate this question

Topics

Parallel Reasoning and Parallel Flaw

More questions from this topic