Analyze the flawed reasoning in each argument below. Match each argument (1-4) to the abstract description that most accurately identifies its logical vulnerability.
- A recent analysis found that metropolitan areas with a high density of public parks have significantly lower rates of cardiovascular disease. The health commissioner has therefore proposed building ten new parks, arguing that this initiative will directly reduce the incidence of heart disease among residents.Takes for granted that two phenomena that frequently occur together are causally connected, without considering alternate explanations for the association.
- To be considered for the prestigious Archival Research Fellowship, a candidate must have published at least one peer-reviewed article. Since Julian recently had his first article accepted by the Journal of Antiquities, he is guaranteed to be awarded the fellowship this cycle.Mistakenly assumes that satisfying a prerequisite condition is enough to guarantee that a specific outcome will occur.
- The opposition claims our proposed urban zoning policy is not sound. But independent acoustical tests confirm that the operation of the new facilities permitted by the policy will generate sound at levels well below the threshold of human hearing. Thus, the opposition's concerns are baseless.Exploits the multiple meanings of a word by using it in one sense in a premise and in a completely different sense in the conclusion.
- A decade ago, the university enrolled 5,000 international students. This year, it enrolled only 4,000 international students. Therefore, international students must now make up a smaller percentage of the university's overall student body than they did a decade ago.Reaches a conclusion about a proportion or ratio on the basis of evidence that relates solely to absolute quantities.
Cevap
Argument 1 matches with the correlation/causation flaw. Argument 2 matches with confusing a necessary condition for a sufficient one. Argument 3 matches with the equivocation flaw. Argument 4 matches with the numbers versus percentages flaw.
Each argument contains exactly one primary logical vulnerability. Argument 1 infers causation from correlation. Argument 2 illegally reverses a conditional statement. Argument 3 equivocates on the word 'sound'. Argument 4 confuses absolute quantities with proportional percentages. The abstract descriptions perfectly encapsulate these structural errors.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
Flaw in the Reasoning
Tahmini Süre:2m 30s