Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: Çok zorWeakening Arguments

To reduce financial losses from fraudulent claims, a major art insurer instituted a rule requiring all paintings valued over $100,000 to undergo advanced spectroscopic pigment testing prior to policy issuance. The insurer reasoned that because fraudulent claims overwhelmingly involve recent forgeries crafted with modern synthetic pigments that spectroscopic testing easily identifies, this mandatory pre-issuance verification would drastically cut the firm's fraudulent payout losses. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the insurer's reasoning?

  1. Fraudulent claims involving paintings valued over $100,000 predominantly stem from staged disappearances of genuine artworks rather than the submission of forged pieces.Cevap
  2. B
    Spectroscopic chemical analysis accurately detects synthetic pigments with a reliability rate exceeding 99 percent.
  3. C
    Art collectors often express reluctance to purchase insurance policies that require removing microscopic pigment samples from valuable canvases.
  4. D
    The operational cost of conducting spectroscopic testing is typically passed on to policyholders as an administrative surcharge.
  5. E
    Fraudulent insurance claims on art items valued under 100,000representahigheroverallvolumeofannualclaimsthanthoseonitemsabove100,000 represent a higher overall volume of annual claims than those on items above 100,000.

Cevap

The insurer's plan relies on the assumption that fraudulent claims on high-value paintings depend on insuring forged artworks. Demonstrating that high-value fraud primarily involves staged disappearances of genuine paintings undermines the effectiveness of pre-issuance authentication.
The correct answer weakens the argument by exposing a flaw in the plan's core assumption. The insurer assumes that fraudulent payouts occur because forged paintings are successfully insured. However, if fraudsters stage thefts of genuine paintings, the painting presented at policy issuance is authentic and will easily pass spectroscopic testing. Consequently, the insurer remains vulnerable to fraudulent payouts despite implementing mandatory testing.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the core argument structure
Premise: Fraudulent claims overwhelmingly involve recent forgeries using synthetic pigments, which spectroscopic testing detects. Plan: Require spectroscopic testing prior to policy issuance for paintings over $100,000. Conclusion: Fraudulent payout losses will be drastically cut.
Identifying the link between the premise (detecting fake canvases at issuance) and the conclusion (reducing payout losses) reveals the key unstated assumption.
2
Identify the unstated logical assumption
The insurer assumes that fraudulent claims on policies above $100,000 rely on getting forged paintings authenticated and insured in the first place.
If the fraud mechanism does not depend on insuring fake canvases, authentication at issuance will not stop fraudulent claims.
3
Evaluate the choices to find the statement that breaks this link
The statement indicating that fraud in the target price bracket mainly involves staged disappearances of genuine artworks shows that paintings will pass the initial spectroscopic test, rendering the protocol ineffective at preventing fraudulent payouts.
This introduces an alternative mechanism of fraud that completely bypasses pre-issuance pigment inspection.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Plan Feasibility and Unstated Assumptions in Causal Reasoning
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Weakening Arguments

Bu konudan daha fazla soru