Match each flawed argument excerpt on the left with the description on the right that most accurately identifies its primary reasoning vulnerability.
- Archaeologist: Every fossil site in the eastern basin that preserves intact hominid footprints also contains extensive volcanic ash layers. Since the newly excavated site at Omo Valley contains extensive volcanic ash layers, it must preserve intact hominid footprints.Treats a condition that is necessary for a particular outcome as though it were sufficient to guarantee that outcome.
- Health Economist: Recent public health surveys indicate that adults who regularly take dietary supplements visit physicians less frequently than those who do not. Therefore, taking dietary supplements directly prevents medical illnesses that would require clinical care.Infers that a causal relationship exists between two phenomena solely on the basis of an observed correlation.
- Art Historian: The renowned architect argues that the ancient ceremonial palace was designed around precise celestial alignments. However, this architect was recently investigated for fabricating archival records, so her hypothesis regarding the palace must be false.Directs criticism toward the person advocating a claim rather than assessing the substantive evidence for the claim itself.
- Materials Scientist: Each individual composite ceramic tile used in the spacecraft's thermal protection shield is capable of withstanding temperatures exceeding 3,000 degrees Celsius without degradation. Thus, the entire thermal shield system assembled from these tiles will maintain structural integrity at that temperature.Concludes that an entire system must have a specific property merely because every individual component of that system possesses that property.
Answer
The archaeologist's argument matches the description of treating a necessary condition as sufficient; the health economist's argument matches inferring causation from correlation; the art historian's argument matches directing criticism at the source rather than the claim; and the materials scientist's argument matches inferring that a whole system possesses a property of its individual parts.
Each flawed argument exhibits a classic formal or informal reasoning vulnerability: (1) The archaeologist's argument treats the presence of volcanic ash, which is merely a necessary correlate for footprint preservation, as a sufficient condition to conclude footprints exist. (2) The health economist's argument leaps from an observed statistical association between supplement use and fewer physician visits to an unverified causal claim. (3) The art historian's argument rejects a claim by attacking the past honesty of the person proposing it rather than testing the claim's merits. (4) The materials scientist's argument commits a composition fallacy by assuming an assembled system automatically retains the thermal properties of its constituent individual tiles.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Flaw in the Reasoning: Identifying formal conditional errors, causal fallacies, ad hominem attacks, and errors of composition
Estimated Time:1m 30s