Tüm alıştırma soruları

3960 soru

Soru 1601Soru →

Last year, the city of Granchester reported a 15% increase in the absolute number of workplace injuries compared to the previous year. However, according to the city's labor department, the overall workplace injury rate—calculated as the number of injuries per 100,000 hours worked—actually decreased by 5% during the exact same period.

Which of the following statements, if true, help to resolve the apparent discrepancy described above? (Select all that apply.)

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Several massive manufacturing plants opened in Granchester last year, increasing the total number of hours worked by the city's labor force by over 25%.; Due to a booming regional economy, a substantial number of Granchester residents who previously worked part-time transitioned to overtime-heavy full-time employment last year, vastly expanding the total hours worked citywide.

Cevap

The correct statements are those that demonstrate a massive increase in the total number of hours worked by the city's labor force, thereby increasing the denominator of the rate calculation by a larger percentage than the numerator.
The discrepancy relies on the relationship between absolute numbers (a numerator) and a rate (a fraction). The rate is calculated as Total Injuries divided by Total Hours Worked. Because the problem states that the numerator (Injuries) increased by 15%, the only mathematical way for the overall rate to decrease is if the denominator (Total Hours Worked) increased by more than 15%. Both correct statements provide logical, real-world mechanisms—new factories opening and a shift to overtime-heavy full-time work—that would massively inflate the total hours worked in the city, perfectly resolving the mathematical paradox.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the two seemingly contradictory facts in the stimulus.
Fact 1: Absolute injuries increased by 15%. Fact 2: The injury rate (injuries per 100,000 hours worked) decreased by 5%.
Understanding the exact metric being measured is essential for resolving statistical paradoxes.
2
Formulate the mathematical relationship between the two facts.
Rate = (Absolute Injuries) / (Total Hours Worked).
Exposing the underlying formula reveals how both facts can be simultaneously true.
3
Determine what condition must be met to resolve the discrepancy.
For the overall fraction (Rate) to decrease while the numerator (Injuries) increases by 15%, the denominator (Total Hours) must increase by more than 15%.
This sets the criteria for the correct answers: we need statements that prove a massive surge in total hours worked.
4
Evaluate the answer choices against the required condition.
The statements detailing the opening of massive manufacturing plants and the transition from part-time to overtime-heavy full-time work both perfectly explain a massive surge in total hours worked.
Identifying the mechanisms that manipulate the denominator correctly isolates the answers.

Anahtar Kavram

To resolve a paradox where an absolute count increases but the proportional rate decreases, you must identify a factor that causes the baseline denominator (e.g., total population, total hours) to increase at an even faster pace than the absolute count.
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 1602Soru →

City official: We are planning to replace our current fleet of diesel public buses with electric buses to reduce the city's overall carbon footprint. Although manufacturing electric buses generates more carbon emissions than manufacturing diesel buses, electric buses produce zero emissions while operating. Therefore, completing this fleet replacement will successfully reduce our overall carbon footprint.

Which of the following statements are necessary assumptions required by the city official's argument? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The electric buses will remain in operation long enough for the emissions saved by their use to exceed the additional carbon emissions produced during their manufacturing.; The methods used to generate the electricity powering the new buses will not produce carbon emissions that offset the operational emission savings.

Cevap

The correct necessary assumptions are that the electric buses will operate long enough to offset their manufacturing emissions, and that the electricity source will not produce emissions that negate the operational savings.
The argument concludes that the fleet replacement will successfully reduce the city's overall carbon footprint, despite the higher manufacturing emissions of the electric buses. For this to be mathematically and logically true, two realities must hold: the operational savings must eventually surpass the initial manufacturing deficit, and the energy source powering the buses must not introduce massive new emissions that cancel out the operational benefits. If either of these statements is false, the carbon footprint would increase or stay the same, utterly destroying the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's core components: the premises and the conclusion.
Premise: Electric buses have zero operational emissions but higher manufacturing emissions than diesel buses. Conclusion: The fleet replacement will successfully reduce the overall carbon footprint.
Understanding the exact boundaries of the argument is essential to finding the logical gaps between the provided evidence and the conclusion.
2
Locate the conceptual gaps in the reasoning.
Gap 1: The time required in service to offset the higher manufacturing emissions is never stated. Gap 2: The emissions originating from the electricity used to run the 'zero-emission' buses are ignored.
Necessary assumptions always bridge a conceptual gap between the premises provided and the conclusion drawn by the author.
3
Apply the Negation Technique to the strongest potential answers.
Negating the correct statements causes the argument to collapse entirely: if the buses don't last long enough to offset manufacturing, or if the power grid relies on high-emission sources, the total carbon footprint will not decrease.
A strictly necessary assumption is one that, if proven false, actively destroys the argument's conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Necessary Assumptions using the Negation Technique
Soru 1603Soru →

Political theorist: A democratic government is legitimate only if it governs with the consent of the governed. Recent independent surveys demonstrate that a majority of the citizens in the nation of Oakhaven strongly oppose the current government's sweeping economic reforms. Therefore, it is clear that the government of Oakhaven has lost its legitimacy.

Which one of the following, if assumed, allows the political theorist's conclusion to be properly drawn?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Any government whose sweeping economic reforms are strongly opposed by a majority of its citizens fails to govern with the consent of the governed.

Cevap

The correct assumption is that any government whose sweeping economic reforms are strongly opposed by a majority of its citizens fails to govern with the consent of the governed.
The argument requires a logical bridge between the citizens' opposition to economic policies and the withdrawal of their overall consent to be governed. By establishing a universal rule that majority opposition to sweeping economic reforms guarantees that a government fails to govern with the consent of the governed, this assumption perfectly completes the logical chain. When combined with the premises, it forces the conclusion to be absolutely true.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the conclusion.
The main conclusion is that the government of Oakhaven has lost its legitimacy.
Identifying the final claim is always the critical first step in evaluating an argument's structure.
2
Analyze the premises.
Premise 1 states that legitimacy requires governing with the consent of the governed. Premise 2 states that a majority of Oakhaven citizens strongly oppose the government's current economic reforms.
We must identify the exact evidence provided to see what is missing in the logical chain.
3
Identify the logical gap.
The argument makes a leap from the fact that 'citizens oppose economic reforms' to the conclusion that the government has 'lost legitimacy' (which, based on the first premise, means it no longer governs with their consent).
A sufficient assumption must explicitly provide this missing link to force the conclusion to follow with 100% certainty.
4
Formulate the required bridge.
We need a conditional rule stating that if a majority opposes a government's economic reforms, then that government fails to govern with the consent of the governed.
Applying this rule to Oakhaven's situation directly triggers the condition for losing legitimacy.

Anahtar Kavram

Bridging logical gaps in conditional arguments
Soru 1604Soru →

Examine the brief arguments provided below. Each argument exhibits a distinct logical flaw. Match each argument on the left with the abstract description that most accurately identifies its error in reasoning.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

To become a certified master chef, one must demonstrate exceptional knife skills. Since Julian possesses extraordinary knife skills, he is clearly qualified to be a certified master chef.
A recent study of urban commuters found that individuals who listen to classical music on their way to work report significantly lower stress levels. Thus, the soothing tempo of classical music actively reduces occupational stress.
The newly formed architectural firm is composed entirely of designers who have won prestigious individual awards for innovation. Therefore, the firm as a whole will undoubtedly produce innovative, award-winning collaborative projects.
The city planner argued that the new public transit system is highly reliable because it utilizes well-tested, durable train cars. However, the trains are frequently delayed by signaling issues, so the transit system is clearly not reliable.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The chef argument matches the necessary/sufficient flaw description; the commuter argument matches the correlation/causation flaw; the architect argument matches the part-to-whole flaw; and the transit system argument matches the equivocation flaw.
Each correct pairing accurately links a specific, flawed argument to its formal abstract logical description. The first argument exhibits a conditional logic flaw by treating a requirement as a guarantee. The second demonstrates a causal flaw by assuming a correlation implies causation. The third shows a fallacy of composition by assuming the firm will inherit the traits of its individual designers. The fourth displays equivocation by using the term 'reliable' in two different ways.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the first argument regarding the master chef to identify its structural flaw.
Identified as confusing a necessary requirement with a sufficient guarantee.
Conditional logic errors are a primary category of logical flaws, often confusing what is required with what is enough.
2
Examine the second argument about commuters and classical music.
Identified as assuming causation from a mere correlation.
Observational studies often present correlated variables that do not necessarily have a direct causal link, as other factors could be involved.
3
Evaluate the third argument concerning the architectural firm.
Identified as inappropriately applying characteristics of individuals to the group they form.
Properties of parts do not automatically transfer to the whole, which is known as the fallacy of composition.
4
Assess the fourth argument about the public transit system.
Identified as shifting the meaning of the word 'reliable' mid-argument.
Logical consistency requires key terms to maintain the exact same definition throughout the premises and conclusion; shifting meanings creates an equivocation flaw.

Anahtar Kavram

Parallel Flaw
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 1605Soru →

Analyze the logical structures of the following four excerpts from various disciplines. Which abstract description best identifies the logical flaw in each argument? Match each flawed argument to its corresponding reasoning error.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

The newly appointed director of the historical archives argued that the institution must become more accessible to the public. Thus, by investing heavily in physical ramps and widening the museum's doorways, the director is demonstrably fulfilling her mandate for greater accessibility.
According to classical taxonomy, any marine organism exhibiting bilateral symmetry and a closed circulatory system will invariably possess a defined central nervous system. The abyssal creature C. luminosa possesses a central nervous system; therefore, it undeniably exhibits bilateral symmetry and a closed circulatory system.
In the intricate design of the revolutionary quantum processor, each individual superconducting qubit operates with a negligible error rate. Consequently, the processor in its entirety, which synchronizes thousands of such qubits, must also operate with a negligible overall error rate.
The collapse of the civic theater initiative stems from either a deficit in philanthropic funding or profound community disinterest. Yet municipal financial records reveal an unprecedented surge in philanthropic arts donations this year. Therefore, the initiative's collapse was undoubtedly caused by profound community disinterest.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The archives argument pairs with the equivocation flaw; the taxonomy argument pairs with the sufficient-necessary confusion; the quantum processor argument pairs with the composition flaw; and the civic theater argument pairs with the false dilemma.
Each argument exhibits a distinct structural flaw that corresponds to a specific abstract description. The archives argument shifts the meaning of a key term. The taxonomy argument illegitimately reverses a conditional statement. The quantum argument assumes the whole shares the exact property of its parts. The theater argument ignores alternative explanations, presenting a false dichotomy.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the historical archives argument to identify its structural flaw.
The term 'accessible' changes meaning from conceptual availability to physical entry.
Identifying shifted terminology is necessary to match it with the ambiguity/equivocation description.
2
Evaluate the taxonomy argument to determine the logical error in its conditional reasoning.
The argument affirms the necessary condition (central nervous system) to falsely conclude the sufficient conditions (bilateral symmetry).
This reveals a classic illegal reversal, matching the description of confusing necessary and sufficient conditions.
3
Examine the quantum processor argument for flaws relating to the scope of its conclusion.
The argument wrongly attributes the property of the individual parts (qubits) directly to the complex whole (the processor).
This fits the structural definition of a composition flaw.
4
Analyze the civic theater argument to spot the error in its disjunctive conclusion.
The argument ignores other potential causes for the initiative's failure beyond funding and disinterest.
This confirms the presence of an unwarranted assumption that the stated alternatives are exhaustive, which is a false dilemma.

Anahtar Kavram

Parallel Flaw
Soru 1606Soru →

Ornithologist: The endangered Kakapo bird relies almost entirely on the fruit of the Rimu tree for breeding. In fact, Kakapos only attempt to breed during years when the Rimu tree produces a massive abundance of fruit, an event known as "mast seeding." Climate models predict that rising average temperatures will cause Rimu trees to mast seed every two years over the next century, rather than their historical average of once every five years. Therefore, the frequency of Kakapo breeding seasons will significantly increase over the next century.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Kakapos do not require a biological recovery period between breeding attempts that is substantially longer than two years.

Cevap

The assumption that Kakapos do not require a biological recovery period substantially longer than two years.
The correct answer bridges the gap between the environmental availability of the fruit and the biological capability of the bird. The argument relies on the premise that Kakapos only breed when the Rimu tree mast seeds, making mast seeding a necessary condition. However, just because this necessary condition will occur more frequently (every two years) does not guarantee the birds can exploit it. If the Kakapos require a biological recovery period of three or four years between breeding attempts, the increased frequency of mast seeding would not lead to a corresponding increase in breeding seasons. By stating that they do not require a recovery period longer than two years, this assumption is strictly logically required for the conclusion to hold.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The frequency of Kakapo breeding seasons will significantly increase over the next century.
This is the ornithologist's final predictive claim, signaled by the keyword 'Therefore'.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
Kakapos only breed during mast seeding years (making it a necessary condition). Climate change will increase mast seeding frequency from every 5 years to every 2 years.
These facts form the foundation of the author's prediction.
3
Analyze the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The argument assumes that environmental resource availability (fruit) is the only barrier to more frequent breeding, ignoring the birds' biological capacity.
Just because a required resource appears more frequently does not mean the organism is biologically capable of utilizing it more frequently.
4
Apply the Negation Test to the choices.
Negating the correct statement ('Kakapos DO require a recovery period substantially longer than two years') completely undermines the conclusion.
If the birds biologically cannot breed every two years, the increased frequency of mast seeding will not lead to a significant increase in breeding seasons.

Anahtar Kavram

Applying the Negation Test to identify gaps between environmental conditions and biological capabilities.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 1607Soru →

To combat rising traffic congestion in its downtown business district, the city of Oakhaven recently doubled the frequency of its public bus service and reduced fares. Within three months, city officials noted that the total number of passenger cars entering the downtown district daily had decreased by 30 percent, as many commuters switched to taking the bus. Nevertheless, the average time it takes a vehicle to cross the downtown district during rush hour has significantly increased over the same period.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The transit authority accommodated the doubled bus frequency by deploying a fleet of articulated buses that are much longer than standard buses and frequently block multiple lanes at intersections.

Cevap

The transit authority accommodated the doubled bus frequency by deploying a fleet of articulated buses that are much longer than standard buses and frequently block multiple lanes at intersections.
This option introduces a new factor—the disruptive size and turning radius of the new articulated buses—that completely explains why traffic has slowed down. Even though there are fewer passenger cars, the new buses cause massive bottlenecks that increase the average travel time for all vehicles, smoothly reconciling both facts.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the two apparently conflicting facts in the stimulus.
Fact 1: The number of passenger cars entering downtown decreased by 30 percent. Fact 2: The average time to cross the downtown district by vehicle significantly increased.
Resolving a paradox requires precisely understanding the two sides of the discrepancy.
2
Determine what the correct answer must accomplish.
The correct answer must explain how traffic delays could increase despite a massive 30 percent reduction in passenger cars.
A valid resolution must actively bridge the gap between the two conflicting facts without contradicting either one.
3
Evaluate the options to find the one that resolves the discrepancy while actively eliminating options that deepen it.
The correct option shows that the new buses themselves are causing severe bottlenecks, explaining the increased travel time despite fewer cars. Options that remove even more traffic from the road must be eliminated as they deepen the paradox.
This provides a new causal mechanism (bus size and lane blocking) that overrides the expected benefit of having fewer cars.

Anahtar Kavram

Resolving a paradox requires finding a new piece of information that allows both seemingly contradictory premises to be true simultaneously, while actively avoiding trap choices that would make the premises even harder to reconcile.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 1608Soru →

Neurobiologist: In a recent experiment, laboratory mice whose daily diets were supplemented with the artificial sweetener Zytrol performed significantly worse on spatial memory tasks than a group of mice whose diets were supplemented with an equal caloric amount of natural sucrose. Therefore, we can conclude that the consumption of Zytrol actively impairs spatial memory function.

Statement: The newly discovered fact that mice fed a standard baseline diet containing neither Zytrol nor sucrose performed identically on the spatial memory tasks to the mice fed Zytrol significantly weakens the neurobiologist's argument.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True
The statement accurately identifies a classic weakening scenario involving experimental baselines. The neurobiologist's argument relies on a flawed comparison, implicitly assuming the sucrose group represents normal cognitive function. By revealing that a truly neutral baseline yields the exact same results as the Zytrol group, the new evidence shifts the causal arrow, indicating that sucrose improves memory rather than Zytrol impairing it. This destroys the argument's core causal claim, making the statement definitively true.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument's structure to isolate the premise and conclusion.
Premise: Zytrol-fed mice performed worse than sucrose-fed mice. Conclusion: Zytrol actively impairs memory.
Identifying the core components of the argument is necessary to spot the logical gap.
2
Identify the logical flaw in the neurobiologist's reasoning.
The argument lacks a proper neutral control group, conflating a relative difference (worse than sucrose) with an absolute decline (active impairment).
Recognizing the flawed comparison reveals how the argument is vulnerable to attack.
3
Assess the logical impact of the new statement provided in the prompt.
The statement introduces a neutral baseline group that performs identically to the Zytrol group, proving Zytrol causes no deviation from normal function.
We must evaluate whether this new information exploits the logical gap identified in Step 2.
4
Determine if the new statement weakens the argument.
Yes. It provides an alternative cause for the performance gap (sucrose enhances memory, Zytrol does nothing), thereby severely weakening the original claim.
Concluding the evaluation of the statement's effect on the argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Weaken
Soru 1609Soru →

Policy Analyst: To combat congestion, the city of Oakhaven recently implemented a $10 toll for private vehicles entering the downtown business district during morning rush hour. Last month, which was the first month of the toll, the number of private vehicles entering the district during morning rush hour dropped by 30% compared to the previous month. Therefore, the financial cost of the toll must be what deterred these drivers from entering the district during morning rush hour.

Which of the following are necessary assumptions required by the policy analyst's argument?

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The 30% reduction in morning rush hour traffic was not primarily caused by a concurrent, unrelated disruption to the main access routes into the downtown district.; A significant portion of the drivers who ceased commuting into the district during morning rush hour were not shielded from the toll's financial impact by employer reimbursements.

Cevap

The argument fundamentally requires ruling out alternative causes for the traffic decrease and establishing that the drivers who stopped driving actually experienced the financial burden.
To validly conclude that the financial cost of the toll directly caused the 30% drop in traffic, the argument depends on two key elements. First, it must assume that no other major event (like a sudden road closure) caused the drop instead. Second, it relies on the mechanism of 'financial cost' acting as a deterrent; this requires assuming that the drivers who stopped actually faced that cost, rather than having it entirely subsidized by their employers. Both of these statements pass the Negation Test: if either is negated, the analyst's causal conclusion completely collapses.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the core argument.
Premise: Toll implemented -> Traffic dropped 30%. Conclusion: The financial cost of the toll caused the drop.
Deconstructing the argument reveals a causal claim based on a sequence of events.
2
Identify vulnerabilities in the causal claim.
The argument assumes no other event caused the drop (correlation vs. causation) and assumes the drivers actually felt the financial cost of the toll.
Necessary assumptions in causal arguments typically defend against alternative causes or bridge the gap between the mechanism (cost) and the result (deterrence).
3
Apply the Negation Technique to the plausible options.
Negating the option about route disruptions provides an alternative cause, destroying the argument. Negating the option about employer reimbursements removes the financial cost from the drivers, also destroying the argument.
The Negation Technique is the definitive test for necessary assumptions: if the logical opposite of a choice makes the conclusion impossible, the choice is necessarily assumed.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying necessary assumptions in causal arguments requires either a 'Defender' assumption (ruling out alternative causes) or a 'Supporter' assumption (connecting the premise's mechanism to the conclusion).
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 1610Soru →

Wellness Coach: Clients who consume a diet high in refined carbohydrates frequently experience a noticeable crash in their physical energy by mid-afternoon. Such physical exhaustion can hinder one's daily productivity. Therefore, if you wish to lead a life full of boundless energy, you must align your spiritual energy through mindful meditation each morning.

Determine whether the following statement accurately describes the logical flaw in the argument:

The reasoning in the wellness coach's argument is flawed because it presumes, without providing justification, that refined carbohydrates are the only cause of mid-afternoon exhaustion.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False
The statement incorrectly identifies the logical flaw in the stimulus. The wellness coach does not assume refined carbohydrates are the exclusive cause of exhaustion; rather, the argument's fundamental error is equivocation—illicitly shifting from a biological definition of 'energy' in the premise to a mystical definition of 'energy' in the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the structure and terminology of the argument.
The premise discusses 'physical energy' and 'physical exhaustion' caused by carbohydrates. The conclusion shifts to discussing 'boundless energy' and 'spiritual energy' achieved through meditation.
Identifying subtle shifts in language is critical for spotting logical flaws, especially equivocation.
2
Evaluate the flaw described in the prompt's statement.
The statement claims the primary flaw is assuming carbohydrates are the 'only cause' of exhaustion (a causal reasoning error).
We must verify if the argument actually relies on this specific assumption to draw its conclusion.
3
Compare the actual argument's logic to the described flaw.
The argument does not state or assume carbohydrates are the only cause; it simply notes them as a frequent cause. The actual gap in logic is using the word 'energy' in two completely different senses to draw a conclusion. Therefore, the statement's description of the flaw is incorrect.
Since the statement describes a flaw that is not the primary error present, the statement itself must be evaluated as false.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Equivocation vs. Causal Flaws
Soru 1611Soru →

Securing a patent for a software algorithm necessitates that the source code resolves a unique technical problem rather than merely automating a known business practice. The newly developed 'Nexus' algorithm definitively solves a previously intractable technical bottleneck in data routing. Consequently, the Nexus algorithm will undoubtedly be granted a patent.

Which of the following arguments exhibits a flawed pattern of reasoning most similar to that exhibited by the argument above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Because achieving optimal bloom requires a species of orchid to be exposed to consistent nightly temperature drops, the rare ghost orchid is sure to achieve an optimal bloom this season. After all, meteorologists predict consistent nightly temperature drops for the entire region where it is cultivated.

Cevap

The argument concerning the rare ghost orchid and its optimal bloom accurately mirrors the flaw found in the original text.
The stimulus argument exhibits a classic conditional logic flaw: treating a necessary condition as if it were a sufficient condition. It establishes that solving a unique technical problem is required (necessitated) to secure a patent. It then observes that the Nexus algorithm met this requirement, and flawed conclusions that it is therefore guaranteed a patent. The correct answer choice mirrors this exactly in a different context: it establishes that temperature drops are required for an optimal bloom, notes that the ghost orchid will experience these drops, and flawed conclusions that the bloom is therefore guaranteed. The structural mapping is identical, even though the correct choice buries the conclusion in the middle of the text to increase difficulty.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the logical structure of the stimulus argument.
Premise 1: Patent → Resolves technical problem (Necessary condition). Premise 2: Nexus → Resolves technical problem. Conclusion: Nexus → Patent.
Identifying the formal logic relationships is required to abstract the argument's structure.
2
Identify the specific logical flaw committed in the stimulus.
The argument confuses a necessary condition for a sufficient condition. Just because the algorithm met a requirement for a patent does not guarantee it will receive one.
Parallel Flaw questions require finding an answer choice that commits the exact same error in reasoning.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find the matching flawed structure, ignoring subject matter.
The correct option states: Optimal bloom → Temp drops (Necessary condition). Ghost orchid → Temp drops. Conclusion: Ghost orchid → Optimal bloom.
This choice perfectly replicates the 'confusing necessary for sufficient' flaw, despite the premises and conclusion being presented in a different grammatical order.

Anahtar Kavram

Parallel Flaw: Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Soru 1612Soru →

Nutritional Biochemist: The recently synthesized compound 'Z-Sweet' binds perfectly to the tongue's sweet-taste receptors but is entirely indigestible by human metabolic enzymes. Furthermore, longitudinal studies confirm that ingesting Z-Sweet fails to trigger the release of pancreatic insulin. Consequently, substituting dietary sugar with Z-Sweet will guarantee a reduction in overall body adiposity while permanently eliminating neurochemical sugar addiction.

Based on the biochemist's reasoning, which of the following statements act as required supporter assumptions that logically bridge gaps in the argument? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The stimulation of sweet-taste receptors by a substance that fails to trigger pancreatic insulin release leads to the elimination of neurochemical sugar addiction.; Substituting dietary sugar with an entirely indigestible substance ensures a reduction in overall body adiposity.

Cevap

The correct assumptions are that stimulating sweet-taste receptors without an insulin response eliminates sugar addiction, and that substituting sugar with an indigestible substance ensures a reduction in adiposity.
The biochemist's argument contains a classic logical leap: it introduces two completely new concepts in the conclusion ('a reduction in overall body adiposity' and 'eliminating neurochemical sugar addiction') that were never mentioned in the evidence. For the conclusion to logically follow, there must be unstated assumptions linking the premise facts (indigestibility, sweet-taste receptor binding, and a lack of insulin) directly to these new outcomes. The two correct statements successfully bridge these distinct conceptual gaps, validating the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the premises to establish the provided evidence.
Z-Sweet binds to receptors, is entirely indigestible, and does not trigger insulin release.
Identifying the foundation of the argument is the first step in finding the logical gap.
2
Analyze the conclusion to identify any 'rogue' or new elements.
The conclusion claims two outcomes: 'a reduction in overall body adiposity' and 'eliminating neurochemical sugar addiction.'
Supporter assumptions are required whenever a conclusion introduces new concepts not explicitly covered by the premises.
3
Formulate the missing links (the Supporter assumptions).
The argument requires a link connecting indigestibility to reduced adiposity, and a link connecting receptor-binding/lack of insulin to eliminating addiction.
The conclusion can only be valid if the evidence logically guarantees these specific new outcomes.
4
Evaluate the answer choices against the formulated missing links.
Two options explicitly provide these exact conceptual bridges without illegally reversing the conditional logic.
Because the prompt requires selecting all valid supporter assumptions, both distinct conceptual gaps must be addressed by the correct selections.

Anahtar Kavram

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Soru 1613Soru →

Consider the following argument:

Art Historian: For an oil painting to be conclusively attributed to the Renaissance master Caravaggio, it must exhibit his signature use of chiaroscuro—a dramatic, high-contrast interplay between light and dark. The recently discovered painting *The Weeping Saint* clearly lacks this dramatic contrast, presenting instead a relatively uniform, flat illumination of its subject. Therefore, *The Weeping Saint* cannot possibly be the work of Caravaggio. Furthermore, since the painting is not a Caravaggio, its current auction reserve price of ten million dollars is entirely unjustified and must be reduced.

Evaluate whether the following statement accurately describes the logical flaw committed in the argument:
The art historian's reasoning is flawed primarily because it treats a characteristic that is required for a painting to be attributed to Caravaggio as a characteristic that is sufficient to guarantee that attribution.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False
The correct answer is False because the statement inaccurately describes the argument's reasoning. The author states that a Caravaggio attribution requires chiaroscuro (Caravaggio -> Chiaroscuro). By demonstrating that the painting lacks this necessary condition, the author correctly applies the contrapositive to conclude it is not a Caravaggio (No Chiaroscuro -> Not Caravaggio). The actual flaw occurs when the author subsequently assumes, without evidence, that only a Caravaggio attribution could justify the painting's high reserve price. Because the author did not confuse necessary and sufficient conditions, the statement evaluating the argument is incorrect.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Diagram the conditional relationship established in the first premise.
Attributed to Caravaggio -> Exhibits chiaroscuro (Chiaroscuro is a necessary condition).
To accurately evaluate whether the author misused conditional logic.
2
Analyze the application of the conditional rule to the specific painting.
The painting lacks chiaroscuro, leading to the conclusion it is not a Caravaggio (No Chiaroscuro -> Not Caravaggio).
To determine if this matches the valid contrapositive or an invalid logical leap.
3
Identify the actual vulnerability in the argument's reasoning.
The argument jumps from 'not a Caravaggio' to 'reserve price is unjustified', assuming no other factors could justify the high price.
To recognize the true flaw and contrast it with the proposed statement.
4
Evaluate the proposed statement against the actual reasoning.
The statement claims the author treated a necessary condition as sufficient. Since the author flawlessly executed a valid contrapositive instead, the statement mischaracterizes the argument.
To determine the final True/False answer.

Anahtar Kavram

Distinguishing valid contrapositive reasoning from the 'necessary vs. sufficient' logical flaw, and identifying the true logical gap in a multi-conclusion argument.
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 1614Soru →

Traditional histories of nineteenth-century art often depict the invention of photography as a catastrophic blow to painted portraiture, arguing that the camera's quick, inexpensive exactitude rendered painters obsolete. While it is true that painters specializing in realistic miniatures suffered economically, a closer examination reveals a reciprocal relationship between the two disciplines.

Rather than simply destroying the market for painted portraits, photography liberated painters from the burden of strict mimetic reproduction. Because photographs effortlessly captured precise physical details, many portrait painters shifted their focus toward capturing the psychological essence and inner emotional state of the sitter. This adaptation laid the groundwork for the subjective interpretations characterizing later art movements.

Conversely, early photographers did not operate in an aesthetic vacuum. To elevate their mechanical process to the status of fine art, photographers routinely adopted the compositional stances, classical backdrops, and dramatic lighting techniques perfected by centuries of painting. The camera provided the new technology, but painting provided the visual grammar.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main idea of the passage?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The invention of photography did not simply displace painted portraiture, but rather fostered a reciprocal evolution in which painting shifted toward psychological expression while photography adopted established painterly conventions.

Cevap

The correct answer accurately synthesizes the reciprocal relationship described in the passage: painting shifted toward capturing psychological essence, while photography adopted traditional painting conventions.
The correct answer accurately captures the implicit synthesis of the passage. The author's thesis is that painting and photography shared a 'reciprocal relationship.' This is supported by two distinct premises: paragraph two explains how painting reacted to photography by shifting to psychological expression, and paragraph three explains how photography borrowed the 'visual grammar' of painting. By combining these two directions of influence, the correct answer perfectly encapsulates the full scope of the passage's argument.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the passage structure to identify the core argument.
The first paragraph introduces a misconception (photography destroyed painting) and a thesis (they had a reciprocal relationship). The second paragraph explains how painting adapted. The third paragraph explains how photography adapted.
Understanding the function of each paragraph is essential for finding the overarching unstated main point.
2
Synthesize the premises into a single main point.
The combined main point is that painting and photography mutually influenced each other, with painting moving toward emotion and photography borrowing traditional visual grammar.
The main point must encompass the entire scope of the passage, not just one paragraph.
3
Evaluate the options against the synthesized main point.
The correct option captures this reciprocal evolution, whereas other options focus on only one side, overgeneralize, or misrepresent the author's stance.
This ensures the selected answer is comprehensive and accurate to the text.

Anahtar Kavram

Synthesizing an implicit main point from distributed premises.
Soru 1615Soru →

Botanist: For any plant species to survive in the highly arid dunes of the central desert, it must have a root system capable of reaching deep subterranean aquifers. The newly classified shrub Silene deserta possesses a remarkably extensive taproot system that has been proven to penetrate to the depth of these underground aquifers. Therefore, it is certain that Silene deserta is capable of surviving in the central desert's highly arid dunes.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the botanist's reasoning?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: takes a condition that is required for a plant species to survive in a particular environment to be a condition that ensures its survival in that environment

Cevap

The correct answer is the option stating that the argument takes a condition that is required for a plant species to survive to be a condition that ensures its survival.
The correct answer accurately identifies an illegal reversal of conditional logic. The first sentence establishes that reaching deep subterranean aquifers is a necessary condition for survival ('must have'). The argument then shows that Silene deserta meets this necessary condition, and concludes that its survival is therefore guaranteed. This illicitly treats a required condition as a sufficient one, failing to consider that there may be other necessary conditions for survival.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is the final sentence: 'Therefore, it is certain that Silene deserta is capable of surviving in the central desert's highly arid dunes.'
This is the primary claim the botanist is attempting to prove, explicitly signaled by the word 'Therefore'.
2
Map the conditional logic established in the premises.
Premise 1 establishes a rule: If a plant survives in the central desert -> It must reach deep aquifers. Premise 2 provides a fact: Silene deserta reaches deep aquifers.
Formalizing the logic reveals the structural relationship between the evidence and the conclusion. 'Must have' introduces a necessary condition.
3
Evaluate how the premises are used to reach the conclusion.
The argument observes that the necessary condition (reaching aquifers) is met, and concludes that the sufficient condition (survival) will definitely occur.
This is a formal logical fallacy. Meeting one requirement for an outcome does not guarantee the outcome, because there may be other unstated requirements (e.g., resisting extreme temperatures).

Anahtar Kavram

Flaw in the Reasoning - Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 1616Soru →

A federal agency recently standardized its data security by implementing a new cryptographic protocol across all its regional branches. Prior to this standardization, branches that independently utilized this specific cryptographic protocol reported the lowest incidence of unauthorized data access within the agency. The new mandate replaced all other security systems with this protocol. A post-implementation review revealed that, although the overall volume of unauthorized data access incidents across the agency fell by 40 percent, the specific branches that had previously utilized the weakest security systems experienced a marked increase in unauthorized access incidents following the protocol's implementation.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the apparent discrepancy presented in the review's findings?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The implementation of a security protocol previously correlated with the lowest incidence of unauthorized access coincided with an increased rate of unauthorized access in the branches that newly adopted it.

Cevap

The correct answer is the option stating that the implementation of a security protocol previously correlated with the lowest incidence of unauthorized access coincided with an increased rate of unauthorized access in the branches that newly adopted it.
The correct answer perfectly captures the essence of the paradox presented in the stimulus. The tension lies in the conflicting facts regarding the security protocol: it was historically associated with the best security outcomes, yet its implementation in the most vulnerable branches resulted in worse security outcomes for those specific branches. It describes the conflict purely based on the text without adding assumptions.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the stimulus to identify the core expectation established by the premises.
The stimulus establishes that the new cryptographic protocol is highly effective, as the branches originally using it had the lowest incidence of data breaches.
Identifying the baseline expectation is necessary to recognize why the subsequent outcome is surprising.
2
Identify the actual outcome that contradicts the established expectation.
When the branches with the weakest security systems adopted this highly effective protocol, their rate of unauthorized access incidents increased.
The discrepancy is the logical gap between the expected outcome (better security) and the actual outcome (worse security for specific branches).
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find the one that accurately describes this precise tension without attempting to explain it.
The correct choice succinctly summarizes the conflict between the protocol's prior successful track record and its counter-intuitive failure in the newly adopting branches.
In 'Identify the Discrepancy' questions, distractors often attempt to resolve the paradox or focus on irrelevant contrasts (such as the agency-wide decrease versus the local increase).

Anahtar Kavram

Isolating the core logical contradiction between an expected outcome based on historical performance and a surprising empirical result, without inadvertently selecting a resolution to the paradox.
Tahmini Süre:2m 30s
Soru 1617Soru →

Art conservator: Traditional chemical solvents used to clean Renaissance oil paintings often seep through the protective varnish and interact directly with the underlying paint pigments. A new cleaning technique, thermal plasma descaling, exclusively removes the outer layer of grime without penetrating the varnish at all. Thus, museums can be assured that employing thermal plasma descaling will never alter the original color balance of these Renaissance paintings.

The art conservator's argument depends on which one of the following assumptions?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The original color balance of a Renaissance oil painting cannot be altered by a cleaning technique unless that technique penetrates the painting's protective varnish.

Cevap

The original color balance of a Renaissance oil painting cannot be altered by a cleaning technique unless that technique penetrates the painting's protective varnish.
This statement provides the necessary logical bridge between the premises and the conclusion. The author argues that because thermal plasma descaling does not penetrate the varnish, it will not alter the color balance. For this logic to hold, the author must assume that penetrating the varnish is a strict requirement for altering the color balance. If we apply the Negation Test—assuming that a painting's color balance CAN be altered by a technique that FAILS to penetrate the varnish—the conservator's entire argument falls apart.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that employing thermal plasma descaling will never alter the original color balance of Renaissance paintings.
Locating the main conclusion is essential for determining what the author is ultimately trying to prove.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
The core premise is that thermal plasma descaling removes grime without penetrating the varnish at all.
Premises provide the stated evidence. The gap will exist between this evidence and the conclusion.
3
Spot the conceptual gap (new elements) in the conclusion.
The premise discusses 'penetrating the varnish', but the conclusion makes a leap to a new concept: 'altering the original color balance'.
In a Supporter Assumption question, the correct answer must explicitly bridge the new concept in the conclusion back to the concepts in the premises.
4
Formulate the required logical bridge.
The argument requires a rule stating that if a technique does not penetrate the varnish, it will not alter the color balance.
Without this rule, it remains entirely possible that thermal plasma descaling alters the color balance through some other mechanism (like heat) without ever penetrating the varnish.
5
Apply the Negation Test to the correct choice to verify it is necessary.
Negating the correct statement yields: 'The color balance CAN be altered even if a technique DOES NOT penetrate the varnish.' This destroys the author's conclusion.
The Negation Test is the definitive proof that an assumption is logically necessary for the argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Soru 1618Soru →

In a recent behavioral study, participants were divided into two groups and asked to solve a complex logic puzzle. Group A was offered a substantial financial reward if they completed the puzzle within one hour. Group B was offered no reward and was simply asked to try the puzzle for fun. Standard behavioral theories strongly predict that large financial incentives increase motivation, thereby leading to faster completion times on cognitive tasks. However, researchers recorded that a significantly higher percentage of participants in Group B successfully completed the puzzle within the hour compared to Group A.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the apparent discrepancy presented in the information above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Group A was provided with a financial incentive predicted to improve cognitive task performance, yet they achieved a lower success rate than Group B, who received no such incentive.

Cevap

The correct answer is the option stating that Group A was provided with a financial incentive predicted to improve performance, yet they achieved a lower success rate than Group B.
The correct answer perfectly captures the logical tension presented in the stimulus. Standard theory predicts that the financial reward given to the first group should lead to better performance. The discrepancy arises because the second group, which lacked this supposedly advantageous incentive, actually completed the puzzle at a significantly higher rate. This option isolates both halves of the surprising contrast without attempting to explain the underlying cause.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the stimulus to isolate the two conflicting sets of facts.
Fact 1: Group A had a financial incentive (predicted by theory to increase success), and Group B had none. Fact 2: Group B had a higher success rate than Group A.
Identifying a discrepancy requires clearly defining the expectation versus the reality.
2
Evaluate the specific task requested by the question stem.
The question asks only to describe the apparent discrepancy.
It is critical to distinguish between identifying a paradox and resolving one. The correct answer must state the conflict, not explain its cause.
3
Review the options to find the precise description of the logical tension.
The correct option successfully contrasts the expectation set by the financial reward for the first group with the surprising reality of the unrewarded group's superior performance.
Other options attempt to explain the cause, focus only on one group's failure, or make unwarranted universal generalizations.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying the core tension between two counter-intuitive premises without attempting to resolve the conflict.
Soru 1619Soru →

Sports psychologist: Any athlete who consistently practices mental imagery techniques experiences a significant reduction in pre-game anxiety. Furthermore, all athletes who experience a significant reduction in pre-game anxiety are able to maintain their concentration during the decisive moments of a competition. Thus, we can conclude that any athlete who consistently practices mental imagery techniques will achieve peak physical performance during tournaments.

Which one of the following is an assumption that, if true, allows the sports psychologist's conclusion to be properly drawn?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Any athlete who maintains concentration during the decisive moments of a competition will achieve peak physical performance during tournaments.

Cevap

The correct answer states that any athlete who maintains concentration during decisive moments will achieve peak physical performance.
The argument's premises establish a chain: practicing mental imagery leads to reduced anxiety, which in turn leads to maintaining concentration (Imagery -> Concentration). The conclusion attempts to prove that practicing mental imagery leads to peak physical performance (Imagery -> Peak Performance). To make this conclusion 100% valid, we must guarantee that maintaining concentration leads to peak physical performance. The correct answer provides exactly this bridge: Concentration -> Peak Performance.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument's premises into conditional statements.
Premise 1: Mental Imagery -> Reduced Anxiety. Premise 2: Reduced Anxiety -> Maintain Concentration.
Identifying the formal logic chain allows us to see exactly what facts the author has established.
2
Identify the argument's final conclusion.
Conclusion: Mental Imagery -> Peak Physical Performance.
We must know the exact endpoint the argument is trying to logically prove.
3
Determine the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The premises link 'Mental Imagery' to 'Maintain Concentration'. The conclusion links 'Mental Imagery' to a new term: 'Peak Physical Performance'. The gap is between 'Maintain Concentration' and 'Peak Physical Performance'.
To guarantee the conclusion, we must find an assumption that connects the end of the premise chain to the new term in the conclusion.
4
Formulate the sufficient assumption.
Maintain Concentration -> Peak Physical Performance.
Adding this statement to the premises creates a complete, unbroken chain from Mental Imagery to Peak Physical Performance.

Anahtar Kavram

Sufficient Assumption conditional bridging
Soru 1620Soru →

Any viable long-term strategy for space exploration requires international cooperation. Therefore, because the newly proposed Mars initiative has secured unprecedented levels of international cooperation, the initiative is guaranteed to be a viable long-term strategy for space exploration.

Which of the following arguments contains a flawed pattern of reasoning most similar to the one exhibited in the argument above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Since the soil in the community plot has been heavily enriched with organic compost to ensure it is nutrient-dense, it will certainly yield a bountiful harvest. This follows from the fact that a bountiful harvest depends on nutrient-dense soil.

Cevap

The correct choice is the argument discussing the community plot's nutrient-dense soil and bountiful harvest, because it perfectly replicates the illegal reversal flaw.
The stimulus argument exhibits a formal logic flaw by confusing a necessary condition with a sufficient condition (an illegal reversal). It establishes that international cooperation is necessary for a viable strategy, but then concludes that achieving international cooperation is sufficient to guarantee viability. The correct answer choice replicates this exact formal error, though it varies the sentence order. It establishes that a bountiful harvest depends on (requires) nutrient-dense soil, but flawed concludes that possessing nutrient-dense soil is sufficient to guarantee a bountiful harvest.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the logical structure and specific flaw in the stimulus.
The stimulus states: Viable Strategy -> Requires International Cooperation. It then concludes: Has International Cooperation -> Guaranteed Viable Strategy. This treats a necessary condition as a sufficient condition, a flaw known as an Illegal Reversal.
To find a parallel flaw, you must accurately extract the abstract conditional structure of the original argument.
2
Evaluate the answer choices to find an identical abstract logical structure.
The correct option states: Bountiful Harvest -> Depends on Nutrient-dense soil. It concludes: Has Nutrient-dense soil -> Guaranteed Bountiful Harvest. It exhibits the exact same Illegal Reversal flaw.
The correct answer must demonstrate the identical logical error, even if the premise and conclusion are presented in a different order.
3
Eliminate distractors based on differing logic types or valid reasoning.
The option concerning economic strategy is logically valid (contrapositive) and acts as a subject matter trap. The startup option is an illegal negation. The hospital option confuses correlation with causation, and the orchestra option is a part-to-whole flaw.
Parallel reasoning questions require a strict match of the logical error type. Superficial similarities in wording are often deliberately misleading.

Anahtar Kavram

Parallel Flaw - Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
ÖncekiSayfa 81 / 198Sonraki
Tüm alıştırma soruları — LSAT | Examkin