Soru

Zorluk: OrtaParallel Reasoning and Parallel Flaw

Ecologist: Every songbird species capable of vocal mimicry possesses a specialized syringeal muscle structure. However, certain avian species indigenous to the cloud forest lack this specialized syringeal muscle structure. Therefore, some avian species indigenous to the cloud forest are not songbird species capable of vocal mimicry.

Which of the following arguments is most similar in its logical reasoning to the argument above?

  1. A
    Every migratory bird inhabiting the wetlands relies on seasonal marshes for nesting. Because many waterfowl species in the sanctuary nest in seasonal marshes, at least some of these waterfowl species must be migratory birds inhabiting the wetlands.
  2. B
    Every commercial agreement approved by the compliance board includes a mandatory dispute resolution clause. The vendor contract submitted yesterday includes a mandatory dispute resolution clause. Therefore, the vendor contract submitted yesterday must have been approved by the compliance board.
  3. Every oil painting restored using traditional resin varnish develops surface micro-cracking over time. Certain sixteenth-century portraits in the municipal gallery have not developed surface micro-cracking over time. Thus, some sixteenth-century portraits in the municipal gallery are not oil paintings restored using traditional resin varnish.Cevap
  4. D
    Every ceramic glaze formulated with feldspar vitrifies at temperatures exceeding one thousand degrees. Some clay vessels fired in the kiln yesterday did not vitrify at temperatures exceeding one thousand degrees. Consequently, no clay vessels fired in the kiln yesterday were ceramic glazes formulated with feldspar.
  5. E
    Every commercial airliner certified for international routes is equipped with redundant navigation transponders. A transport aircraft recently retired from service was never equipped with redundant navigation transponders. Therefore, that retired transport aircraft could not have been certified for international routes.

Cevap

The argument concerning sixteenth-century portraits in the municipal gallery and traditional resin varnish is most similar in its logical reasoning to the original argument.
The correct argument precisely matches the logical blueprint of the stimulus. Both arguments begin with a universal conditional rule (All members of group A possess feature B), introduce a factual premise indicating that certain members of a subcategory C lack feature B, and conclude validly via modus tollens that some members of subcategory C are not members of group A.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Abstract the logical structure of the stimulus argument.
Premise 1: All X have characteristic Y (Universal conditional: X -> Y).
Premise 2: Some members of category Z do not have characteristic Y (Particular negative: Some Z are not-Y).
Conclusion: Therefore, some members of category Z are not members of group X (Valid contrapositive deduction: Some Z are not-X).
Deconstructing the argument into symbolic premises and conclusions isolates the reasoning pattern from the topic.
2
Evaluate the validity and quantifier strength of the stimulus conclusion.
The argument is logically valid and derives a particular negative claim ('some... are not') based on a contrapositive application of the universal premise to a subset.
Parallel reasoning requires matching both logical validity and modal/quantifier certainty.
3
Compare each option against the abstracted logical skeleton.
The choice discussing oil paintings restored with resin varnish establishes: (1) All paintings restored with resin varnish (X) develop micro-cracking (Y); (2) Some sixteenth-century portraits (Z) do not develop micro-cracking (not-Y); (3) Therefore, some sixteenth-century portraits (Z) are not paintings restored with resin varnish (not-X).
This is an exact structural and quantifier match to the stimulus.

Anahtar Kavram

Parallel Quantifier Syllogism and Contrapositive Inference
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Bu soruyu puanla