Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorFlaw in the Reasoning

Financial Regulator: The creators of the 'Equi-Loan' software claim their algorithm produces unbiased loan decisions. To prove this, they demonstrated that the system is trained exclusively on objective data: the strictly factual, verifiable historical records of bank loan approvals and denials over the past fifty years. Since the software's outputs are mathematically derived solely from this objective data, the regulator concludes that the algorithm's loan decisions are indeed objective and therefore unbiased.

The regulator's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

  1. relies on a shift in the meaning of the word 'objective' from the premises to the conclusionCevap
  2. B
    treats a condition that is necessary for a decision-making process to be unbiased as though it were sufficient to guarantee that the process is unbiased
  3. C
    infers a causal relationship between the mathematical derivation of data and fair loan outcomes based solely on a historical correlation
  4. D
    presumes that because the aggregate historical dataset is strictly factual, each individual loan decision produced by the software must also be strictly factual
  5. E
    confuses an intermediate conclusion regarding how the software's outputs are derived with the main conclusion regarding the algorithm's overall fairness

Cevap

The correct answer identifies that the argument relies on a shift in the meaning of the word 'objective' from the premises to the conclusion.
The argument commits the fallacy of equivocation. In the premise, 'objective data' is explicitly defined as 'strictly factual, verifiable historical records'—meaning the records accurately document what happened. In the conclusion, the regulator claims the decisions are 'objective and therefore unbiased'—meaning free from prejudice. Factually recording historical decisions does not mean those historical decisions were fair. An algorithm trained on factually accurate records of heavily biased human decisions will simply replicate that bias. Thus, the data can be 'objective' (factual) without producing 'objective' (unbiased) results.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument's premises.
The core premise is that the software is trained on 'objective data', which the author explicitly defines as 'strictly factual, verifiable historical records'.
Understanding the precise definitions established in the premises is crucial for spotting logical gaps.
2
Analyze the argument's conclusion.
The conclusion claims that because the data is objective, the software's decisions are 'objective and therefore unbiased'.
Isolating the conclusion allows for direct comparison with the supporting premises.
3
Identify the logical disconnect between the premises and the conclusion.
The argument assumes that factually accurate records of past decisions (premise) guarantee that those decisions were fair or unbiased (conclusion). However, accurately recording a biased historical decision just results in an accurate record of bias.
This reveals the underlying vulnerability of the reasoning.
4
Classify the specific flaw committed.
The author uses the term 'objective' to mean 'verifiable/factual' when discussing the data, but uses the same word to mean 'unbiased' when describing the final decisions. This is the fallacy of equivocation.
Matching the logical disconnect to standard LSAT flaw categories allows for selecting the correct abstract description in the choices.

Anahtar Kavram

Equivocation (Uncertain Use of a Term)
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Flaw in the Reasoning

Bu konudan daha fazla soru