To secure a promotion to senior analyst at Meridian Financial, an employee is required to complete the advanced risk modeling certification. David, a junior analyst, has successfully passed the final examination for this advanced certification this week. Therefore, the company's executive management committee will undoubtedly promote David to senior analyst during the upcoming annual performance review cycle.
Which of the following best describes the flaw in the argument's reasoning?
- It treats a condition that is required for promotion as though it were sufficient to guarantee that promotion.Cevap
- BIt mistakes a statistical correlation between certification and promotion for a direct causal relationship.
- CIt assumes without evidence that David's exam performance reflects his overall day-to-day competence.
- DIt ignores the possibility that preparing for the certification exam negatively impacted David's routine tasks.
- EIt assumes that no junior analyst other than David has completed the advanced risk modeling certification.
Cevap
The argument's flaw is that it treats a condition necessary for promotion as sufficient to guarantee that promotion.
The argument states that completing the certification is required for a promotion (a necessary condition). However, the author concludes that because David met this requirement, he is guaranteed to be promoted. Meeting a necessary condition does not guarantee the outcome, as other unstated requirements may exist.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions