Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardFlaw in the Reasoning

Read the stimulus below. Is the provided statement regarding the argument's logical flaw true or false?

Stimulus:
Sports Physiologist: The national cycling team uses a new carbon-fiber bicycle frame, while the regional team uses standard aluminum frames. In recent trials, the national team riders recorded an average speed 15 percent slower than the regional team. However, the national team was testing their bikes on a mountainous outdoor course with steep inclines, whereas the regional team rode on a flat indoor track. Therefore, if the national team had ridden on the flat indoor track, their average speed would have been significantly faster than that of the regional team.

Statement to Evaluate:
The sports physiologist's argument is flawed because it concludes that removing a comparative disadvantage will not only eliminate a performance gap but actually reverse the disparity, without providing evidence that the national team possesses an inherent advantage.

Answer: Answer

Answer

True. The statement accurately describes the logical flaw in the argument.
The provided statement is true because it perfectly distills the argument's logical error into abstract terms. The physiologist establishes that a severe environmental disadvantage (a mountainous course) likely caused the national team's slower times. However, the physiologist leaps to the conclusion that on equal footing (a flat track), the national team would be 'significantly faster.' There is absolutely no evidence in the stimulus demonstrating that the national team or their carbon-fiber bikes are inherently superior. Removing a disadvantage might equalize the speeds, or the national team might still be slower for other reasons.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the argument's premises.
Premise 1: National team (slower) rode on a difficult mountainous course. Premise 2: Regional team (faster) rode on an easy flat track.
To understand the factual evidence provided for the conclusion.
2
Identify the argument's conclusion.
Conclusion: If the national team rode on the flat track, they would be significantly faster than the regional team.
To determine the exact claim that requires logical support.
3
Evaluate the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The premises explain why the national team was slower (an environmental disadvantage). However, they provide no evidence that the national team is inherently faster. Removing the mountain handicap might equalize their speeds, or they might still be slower due to other factors.
To pinpoint the precise flaw in the reasoning.
4
Compare the logical gap to the provided statement.
The statement explicitly describes this gap: concluding that removing a disadvantage reverses the disparity without evidence of inherent superiority. Thus, the statement is true.
To determine if the statement correctly matches the identified flaw.

Key Concept

Identifying unwarranted assumptions regarding the reversal of disparities when confounding variables are eliminated.
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Flaw in the Reasoning

More questions from this topic