Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumStatement and Conclusions or Inferences

Consider the following directives and observation regarding highway transport:

1. Any commercial vehicle transporting hazardous chemicals must display a prominent Class-9 warning placard.
2. A commercial vehicle traveling on the northern expressway is currently displaying a prominent Class-9 warning placard.

Conclusion: The commercial vehicle traveling on the northern expressway is transporting hazardous chemicals.

The conclusion logically follows from the provided directives and observation.

Answer: Answer

Answer

False. The conclusion does not logically follow from the given statements.
The deduction commits the formal logical fallacy of affirming the consequent. The first statement dictates that carrying hazardous chemicals guarantees the presence of a placard, but it does not state that the presence of a placard guarantees the vehicle is actively carrying hazardous chemicals.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the logical structure of the first statement.
It forms a conditional statement: If transporting hazardous chemicals (Condition A), then display Class-9 placard (Condition B).
To establish the exact boundaries of the rule provided in the prompt.
2
Analyze the observation provided in the second statement.
The observation confirms that Condition B is present (the placard is displayed).
To determine what known facts can be applied to the rule.
3
Evaluate the conclusion against formal logical rules.
The conclusion asserts that because Condition B is present, Condition A must be occurring. This is an invalid deduction.
Affirming the consequent (assuming 'If A then B' means 'If B then A') is a formal logical fallacy.

Key Concept

Logical Deduction and the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent
Rate this question

Topics

Statement and Conclusions or Inferences

More questions from this topic