Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardParallel Valid Structure

Any restoration technique that completely removes the oxidized varnish from an antique painting without altering its original pigments must employ a solvent with a pH above 8.0. The recently proposed cleaning technique by Dr. Vance does not employ a solvent with a pH above 8.0. Since it is well documented that Dr. Vance's technique completely removes the oxidized varnish, it follows that his technique must alter the original pigments.

Which of the following arguments is most similar in its pattern of logical reasoning to the argument presented above?

  1. Any corporate merger that effectively eliminates market competition without triggering anti-monopoly laws must involve two companies from different primary sectors. The proposed merger between Omnicorp and Suntech does not involve companies from different primary sectors. Thus, since this merger effectively eliminates market competition, it must trigger anti-monopoly laws.Answer
  2. B
    Any restoration technique that employs a solvent with a pH above 8.0 will completely remove the oxidized varnish from an antique painting without altering its original pigments. The recently proposed cleaning technique by Dr. Vance does not employ a solvent with a pH above 8.0. Since it is well documented that his technique completely removes the oxidized varnish, it must alter the original pigments.
  3. C
    Any hybrid plant cultivar that produces viable seeds without requiring daily watering must possess the recessive gamma allele. The new botanical cultivar possesses the recessive gamma allele. Because the new cultivar produces viable seeds, it must not require daily watering.
  4. D
    Any cognitive behavioral therapy that permanently alters neural pathways must be administered daily over a period of several months. The new behavioral intervention is not administered daily over several months. Thus, the new intervention cannot permanently alter neural pathways, even though it improves short-term memory.
  5. E
    Any municipality that comprehensively overhauls its transit infrastructure must either raise local property taxes or secure a federal grant. The city of Riverton did not secure a federal grant. Since Riverton comprehensively overhauled its transit infrastructure, it must have raised local property taxes.

Answer

The argument concluding that the corporate merger must trigger anti-monopoly laws.
The stimulus presents a valid argument with this exact form: If X and not Y, then Z. Not Z is true. X is true. Therefore, Y is true. The correct option mirrors this perfectly: If a merger eliminates competition (X) and does not trigger anti-monopoly laws (not Y), then it involves different sectors (Z). The merger does not involve different sectors (Not Z). It does eliminate competition (X). Therefore, it must trigger anti-monopoly laws (Y). Both arguments correctly apply Modus Tollens to a compound sufficient condition, followed by Disjunctive Syllogism.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the formal logical structure of the stimulus argument.
The first premise states a compound sufficient condition: If A (removes varnish) AND NOT B (does not alter pigments), then C (pH > 8.0). The second premise provides NOT C. The third premise provides A. The conclusion is B.
Abstracting the argument into formal logic is required to evaluate parallel structures, especially noting that 'without' translates to 'and not'.
2
Determine the logical mechanism used to reach the conclusion.
The argument is valid. Applying Modus Tollens to the premises yields: NOT C implies NOT (A AND NOT B). By De Morgan's Laws, this translates to (NOT A) OR B. Since the stimulus also establishes A as true, we use Disjunctive Syllogism to eliminate (NOT A), leaving B as the logically necessary conclusion.
The correct answer choice must employ this exact sequence of deductive reasoning: Modus Tollens on a compound condition followed by Disjunctive Syllogism.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find the identical logical architecture.
The correct option matches perfectly: If X (eliminates competition) AND NOT Y (does not trigger laws), then Z (different sectors). NOT Z. X is true. Therefore, Y. Both are valid and structurally identical.
Other options use invalid logic (illegal reversal/negation) or valid logic with a mismatched structure (simple Modus Tollens or disjunctive necessity).

Key Concept

Parallel Valid Structure (Modus Tollens on a Compound Condition)
Rate this question

Topics

Parallel Valid Structure

More questions from this topic