Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaIdentifying Logical Fallacies and Reasoning Flaws

The following appeared in a memorandum from the city council of Oakridge:

"Two years ago, Oakridge installed automated speed-enforcement cameras along Main Street. During the subsequent twenty-four months, reported traffic accidents on Main Street decreased by 30 percent, whereas nearby Elm Street, which lacks automated cameras, experienced a 5 percent increase in accidents over the same period. Therefore, to eliminate traffic accidents citywide and optimize municipal expenditures, Oakridge should immediately install automated speed cameras on all city roadways and reduce the police department's traffic patrol personnel by 50 percent."

Which of the following statements best identifies the primary logical flaw in the memorandum's argument?

  1. It uncritically assumes that speed reduction outcomes observed on a major commercial thoroughfare can be generalized to all city roads, while inappropriately assuming automated cameras can fully substitute for broad police patrol functions.Cevap
  2. B
    It fails to account for the possibility that the increase in accidents on Elm Street was directly caused by drivers taking detour routes to avoid the cameras on Main Street.
  3. C
    It relies on accident data gathered over a two-year period, which is too short a timeframe to establish any statistically valid trend regarding traffic safety interventions.
  4. D
    It overlooks the potential financial costs required to purchase, install, and service automated speed cameras across every municipal road.
  5. E
    It fails to evaluate whether neighboring municipalities have achieved similar accident reductions using automated traffic enforcement technology.

Cevap

The argument unsoundly generalizes results from a single major thoroughfare to all city roadways and uncritically assumes automated cameras can replace police patrol functions.
The correct response accurately highlights the argument's dual logical vulnerabilities: falsely extrapolating findings from a single major street to all heterogeneous municipal roadways, and assuming that automated speed detection can fully replace the multifaceted enforcement and deterrence responsibilities of human traffic officers.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument's premises and conclusion.
Premise: Main Street (with cameras) saw a 30% accident drop, while Elm Street (without cameras) saw a 5% accident increase over two years. Conclusion: Installing cameras on all roads and cutting traffic police by 50% will eliminate accidents citywide and optimize costs.
Deconstructing the argument reveals the logical leaps between the sample evidence and the broad policy recommendation.
2
Identify unstated assumptions and generalizability gaps.
The author assumes Main Street is representative of all city roads, and that speed cameras perform all essential safety duties currently provided by human police patrols.
Main Street may have unique traffic patterns, lighting, or speed dynamics not shared by residential or rural roads, and police patrols enforce laws beyond mere speeding (e.g., DUI, reckless driving, traffic signaling).
3
Evaluate the option choices to select the statement that best articulates this flaw.
The correct choice highlights the uncritical extrapolation from one road to all roads, alongside the flawed assumption of functional equivalence between cameras and police officers.
This directly targets the core reasoning vulnerabilities of the passage.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Hasty Generalization and Unfounded Assumptions in Argument Analysis
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Identifying Logical Fallacies and Reasoning Flaws