Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaNecessary vs. Sufficient Condition Flaws

Below are five distinct logical arguments. Identify which of these arguments contains a reasoning error where a condition required to produce a given result is mistakenly treated as guaranteeing that result, or where a condition that guarantees a result is mistakenly treated as a requirement for it. Select all that apply.

  1. Any network that is adequately protected against the new ransomware variant must have implemented the updated firewall protocols. NexusCorp has implemented the updated firewall protocols across all its servers, so its network is undoubtedly protected against the new ransomware variant.Cevap
  2. If an ancient settlement was a major regional trade hub, archaeological digs there will uncover coinage from distant empires. The recently excavated settlement at Oakhaven was clearly not a major regional trade hub. Therefore, excavations there will not uncover any coinage from distant empires.Cevap
  3. C
    Individuals who regularly consume high amounts of refined sugar show a significantly higher risk of developing metabolic disorders. Thus, the recent national increase in metabolic disorders must have been caused by the corresponding increase in refined sugar consumption.
  4. D
    Some startup founders who eventually achieved billion-dollar valuations initially faced multiple bankruptcies. Therefore, it is highly likely that most startup founders who achieve such valuations will face multiple bankruptcies early in their careers.
  5. E
    Every individual department within Zephyr Industries has managed to operate with a balanced budget over the last fiscal year. Therefore, Zephyr Industries as a whole must have operated with a balanced budget over the last fiscal year.

Cevap

The arguments concerning the cybersecurity network (NexusCorp) and the archaeological excavation (Oakhaven) both commit necessary/sufficient condition flaws.
The correct selections perfectly demonstrate the two primary forms of conditional logic confusion. The argument regarding the cybersecurity network commits an illegal reversal by assuming that meeting a minimum requirement (the firewall) guarantees the overall outcome (total protection). The argument regarding the archaeological excavation commits an illegal negation by assuming that failing to meet one sufficient trigger (being a trade hub) entirely eliminates the possibility of the outcome (finding distant coinage).

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the prompt to understand the specific flaw being requested.
The prompt asks for arguments that either treat a required condition as guaranteeing a result (illegal reversal) or treat a guaranteeing condition as a requirement (illegal negation).
Accurately identifying the target flaw is essential before evaluating the answer choices.
2
Evaluate the cybersecurity network argument.
The premise states: Protected -> Updated Firewall. The conclusion states: Updated Firewall -> Protected. This incorrectly treats the necessary condition as sufficient.
This matches the definition of an illegal reversal, making it a correct selection.
3
Evaluate the archaeological excavation argument.
The premise states: Trade Hub -> Distant Coinage. The conclusion states: Not a Trade Hub -> No Distant Coinage. This incorrectly treats the sufficient condition as necessary.
This matches the definition of an illegal negation, making it a correct selection.
4
Evaluate the remaining arguments to rule out other flaw types.
The nutrition argument commits a correlation/causation flaw. The startup argument commits a quantifier overreach flaw. The corporate budget argument commits a composition flaw.
None of these involve confusing necessary and sufficient conditions, confirming they should not be selected.

Anahtar Kavram

Necessary vs. Sufficient Condition Flaws
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Necessary vs. Sufficient Condition Flaws

Bu konudan daha fazla soru