Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumFlaw in the Reasoning

HR Director: Every engineer assigned to the new Alpha Project team is a recognized expert who has individually produced highly efficient, bug-free code on past solo assignments. Because the team is composed exclusively of such exceptional programmers, the team as a whole will undoubtedly produce highly efficient, bug-free software.

The reasoning in the HR Director's argument is flawed in that it:

  1. A
    treats a condition that is necessary for producing bug-free software as though it were sufficient to guarantee the production of bug-free software
  2. B
    fails to distinguish between a subsidiary conclusion about the engineers' past performance and the main conclusion about the team's future output
  3. C
    concludes that a causal relationship exists between the composition of the team and the quality of its output based merely on a past observed correlation
  4. D
    implicitly relies on two different meanings of the word "exceptional" throughout the course of the argument
  5. presumes, without providing justification, that a whole will possess a certain property merely because each of its parts possesses that propertyAnswer

Answer

The argument assumes that a whole will possess a certain property merely because each of its parts possesses that property.
The argument demonstrates a classic Fallacy of Composition. It takes a characteristic that applies to the individual components of a group (the engineers individually write flawless code) and incorrectly concludes that the group as an entire entity will automatically exhibit that exact same characteristic. This logic is flawed because it fails to consider that the interaction of the parts (e.g., communication breakdowns, conflicting coding styles) might prevent the whole from functioning the way the parts do in isolation.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the premises provided in the stimulus.
Premise 1: Each individual engineer on the team has a history of writing flawless code on solo projects. Premise 2: The team is made up entirely of these engineers.
Identifying the foundation of the argument is necessary to evaluate the logic used to reach the conclusion.
2
Identify the main conclusion.
Conclusion: The team as a whole will definitely produce flawless software.
Isolating the conclusion allows for the identification of the gap between the evidence and the final claim.
3
Determine the logical gap or assumption connecting the premises to the conclusion.
The argument assumes that bringing talented individuals together guarantees a talented collective outcome, ignoring how parts interact when combined.
Recognizing this gap reveals the specific structural flaw in the reasoning.
4
Match the identified gap to the correct logical fallacy.
This is the Fallacy of Composition, which occurs when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some or all of the parts.
Standardized test questions require matching the abstract description of the fallacy to the specific error made.

Key Concept

Fallacy of Composition / Division
Rate this question

Topics

Flaw in the Reasoning

More questions from this topic