To earn the Global Eco-Standard certification, a textile manufacturer is required to source at least 80 percent of its organic cotton from certified sustainable farms. Apex Apparels recently completed a comprehensive audit establishing that over 85 percent of the organic cotton used in its manufacturing line originates from certified sustainable farms. Therefore, Apex Apparels will definitely be awarded the Global Eco-Standard certification this year.
Which of the following best describes the flaw in the argument's reasoning?
- AIt relies on an unrepresentative sample of apparel manufacturers to draw a broad conclusion about industry-wide certification standards.
- BIt assumes without justification that achieving the certification will automatically result in an increase in Apex Apparels' market share.
- It treats a requirement that must be satisfied to obtain the certification as a condition that guarantees the certification will be granted.Cevap
- DIt mistakes a correlation between sustainable cotton sourcing and corporate profitability for a direct cause-and-effect relationship.
- EIt infers that failing to meet the cotton sourcing threshold would have no negative impact on Apex Apparels' overall brand reputation.
Cevap
The argument treats a condition that is necessary for obtaining the certification as though it were sufficient to guarantee receiving the certification.
The argument establishes that sourcing at least 80 percent certified organic cotton is a necessary requirement ('is required to') for obtaining the Global Eco-Standard certification. Fulfilling a single necessary prerequisite does not guarantee that the certification will be granted, because Apex Apparels may fail to satisfy other unmentioned requirements (such as environmental compliance or waste management). The reasoning incorrectly treats this necessary prerequisite as a sufficient condition.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s