Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: KolayRuling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender)

After the local bakery switched to using organic flour, the total number of pastries it sold per week increased by 25 percent. The bakery owner concluded that the switch to organic flour caused this increase in pastry sales.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the bakery owner's argument depends?

  1. The recent increase in pastry sales was not primarily caused by the closure of a competing bakery across the street.Cevap
  2. B
    Any bakery that switches to using organic flour will experience an increase in the number of pastries sold.
  3. C
    Customers prefer the taste of pastries made with organic flour over those made with conventional flour.
  4. D
    If the bakery had not switched to using organic flour, the number of pastries it sells per week would have decreased.
  5. E
    The 25 percent increase in pastry sales represents a greater absolute number of pastries than a 25 percent increase would have represented five years ago.

Cevap

The correct answer is the option stating that the increase in sales was not caused by the closure of a competing bakery.
The argument concludes that the switch to organic flour caused the increase in pastry sales, based solely on the evidence that the increase occurred after the switch. To make this causal claim, the author must assume that other potential causes are not responsible for the increase. The correct answer rules out a plausible alternate explanation (the closure of a competitor), thereby defending the causal claim. If we apply the Negation Technique and assume the opposite—that the increase in sales WAS caused by the competitor's closure—the argument's conclusion falls apart.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is: 'the switch to organic flour caused this increase in pastry sales.'
Understanding the main point is required to evaluate what the argument relies upon.
2
Identify the premise supporting the conclusion.
The premise is: 'After the bakery switched... sales increased by 25 percent.'
This establishes the evidence, which is entirely based on two events occurring in sequence.
3
Determine the gap in the reasoning (the assumption).
The author assumes that because the flour switch happened right before the sales increase, it must be the cause. This assumes no other factors caused the increase.
Causal arguments based on chronological sequence inherently assume that alternate explanations are not responsible for the effect.
4
Evaluate the answer choices using the Negation Technique.
Negating the correct option results in: 'The increase in sales WAS primarily caused by the closure of a competing bakery.' This completely destroys the conclusion that the organic flour was the cause.
If negating an answer choice destroys the argument, that choice is a logically necessary assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Ruling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender Assumptions)
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Ruling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender)

Bu konudan daha fazla soru