Assumptions

201 soru

Soru 61Soru →

Match each of the following causal arguments (Left) with the specific unstated assumption upon which its conclusion most heavily relies (Right).

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Studies consistently show that individuals who participate in extreme sports have lower resting heart rates than those who do not. Researchers conclude that the physiological demands of extreme sports directly strengthen cardiac efficiency.
A university study found a strong correlation between the number of hours students spend playing classical music in their dormitories and their final GPAs. The administration concluded that listening to classical music enhances cognitive retention.
Exactly two weeks after the city council launched its new public awareness campaign on water conservation, the municipal reservoir levels stopped declining. The mayor announced that the campaign successfully halted excessive water usage.
An online survey administered to visitors of a holistic wellness blog revealed that 90% of respondents who take herbal supplements report robust immune systems. The author concludes that herbal supplements objectively prevent infectious diseases.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The extreme sports argument pairs with the prerequisite condition assumption. The classical music argument pairs with the underlying demographic factor assumption. The water conservation argument pairs with the temporal relationship assumption. The wellness blog argument pairs with the methodology and selection bias assumption.
Each argument exhibits a distinct vulnerability in its leap from premises to a causal conclusion. The extreme sports argument assumes the purported effect is not actually the initiating cause (reverse causation). The classical music argument assumes a common third variable is not responsible for producing both phenomena. The water campaign argument assumes temporal succession strictly implies causation, failing to rule out concurrent alternative causes. The holistic blog argument assumes its highly flawed, self-selected survey data serves as an objectively reliable foundation.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the causal flaw in the first argument regarding extreme sports and heart rates.
Identify that the argument ignores the possibility that a low resting heart rate is a biological requirement to safely participate in extreme sports.
This is a structural reverse causation flaw, matching the description of an effect actually functioning as a prerequisite condition.
2
Examine the second argument regarding classical music and GPA.
Recognize that both playing classical music and achieving a high GPA could stem from a shared common trait rather than one causing the other.
This points to a 'third variable' assumption, aligning precisely with the description of an unacknowledged demographic or behavioral factor.
3
Evaluate the third argument concerning the water conservation campaign.
Note the strict reliance on chronological sequence ('Exactly two weeks after') to prove the causal claim.
This maps directly to the assumption that a temporal relationship indicates causation without accounting for alternative concurrent events.
4
Assess the final argument about the holistic wellness blog survey.
Identify the compromised data collection method involving a voluntary online survey on a highly curated platform.
This corresponds perfectly to the assumption regarding flawed methodology, systemic selection, and self-reporting biases.

Anahtar Kavram

Assumptions in Causal Arguments
Soru 62Soru →

Retail Analyst: A regional hardware store recently replaced all its traditional cashier lanes with self-service checkout kiosks in an attempt to speed up the checkout process. However, since the transition, the average time a customer spends in the checkout area has actually increased by 15 percent. This shows that the self-service kiosks process individual purchases more slowly than the traditional cashiers did.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The recent increase in the average time customers spend in the checkout area is not entirely attributable to customers waiting longer in line before starting their transactions.

Cevap

The recent increase in the average time customers spend in the checkout area is not entirely attributable to customers waiting longer in line before starting their transactions.
The argument uses an increase in the overall time spent in the checkout area to conclude that the actual processing of transactions has slowed down. However, the overall time in the checkout area consists of both the time spent waiting in line and the time spent processing the transaction. For the conclusion to hold true, the author must assume that the increase in total time was not solely caused by an increase in waiting time. If the increase was entirely due to longer lines, the processing speed might have stayed the same or even improved, which would completely invalidate the conclusion. Therefore, this assumption is strictly necessary.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that self-service kiosks process individual purchases more slowly than traditional cashiers did.
Understanding the main point is required to evaluate what the argument needs to be true.
2
Identify the premise supporting the conclusion.
The premise is that the total average time a customer spends in the checkout area has increased by 15 percent since the kiosks were installed.
This establishes the evidence used to draw the conclusion.
3
Find the logical gap between the premise and the conclusion.
The author conflates 'total time spent in the checkout area' with 'time spent processing individual purchases'. Total time also includes time spent waiting in line.
Identifying the gap reveals the assumption the author is making.
4
Apply the Negation Technique to the correct option.
If the increase in time was entirely attributable to waiting in line, then the transaction processing time did not increase, directly destroying the conclusion.
The Negation Technique definitively proves whether an assumption is logically necessary.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Necessary Assumptions using the Negation Technique and distinguishing between parts and wholes (total time vs. transaction time).
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 63Soru →

Match each flawed logical argument with the specific sufficient assumption that, if added to its premises, strictly guarantees the truth of the conclusion.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Premises: Environmental economists argue that any policy that successfully and significantly reduces carbon emissions inevitably causes a temporary but measurable economic slowdown in the regional manufacturing sector. Analysts project that the newly proposed urban zoning law will certainly cause exactly such a temporary manufacturing slowdown in our district.
Conclusion: Therefore, it is guaranteed that the new urban zoning law will successfully reduce carbon emissions.
Premises: The mayor's comprehensive infrastructure plan relies entirely on aggressively raising commercial and residential property taxes. Historical voting patterns demonstrate that any legislative plan that relies on raising property taxes will inevitably lose the crucial support of middle-class voters across the municipality.
Conclusion: Consequently, the mayor's comprehensive infrastructure plan will fail to be approved by the city council.
Premises: Political scientists assert that truly ethical leaders consistently prioritize governmental transparency over favorable public relations. An analysis of recent administrative decisions reveals that the current governor clearly prioritizes favorable public relations over maintaining any semblance of governmental transparency.
Conclusion: Therefore, it is absolutely certain that the current governor will not be re-elected to another term in office.
Premises: Comprehensive studies of Silicon Valley startups show that the vast majority of highly successful tech entrepreneurs have experienced at least one catastrophic failure in their past ventures. John, a local software developer, has famously experienced a catastrophic failure in his past venture.
Conclusion: As a direct result, John will eventually become a highly successful tech entrepreneur.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The arguments are correctly matched to the assumptions that bridge their respective logical gaps.
Each correct match successfully bridges a specific, structural logical gap in the stimulus argument. The environmental argument requires fixing a conditional reversal; the infrastructure argument requires completing a conditional chain; the political argument requires connecting the contrapositive of the premises to the conclusion; and the tech entrepreneur argument requires upgrading a flawed statistical correlation to a strict universal guarantee.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the environmental policy argument to identify its formal logical gap.
The premises establish 'Reduce Carbon -> Slowdown' and 'Zoning Law -> Slowdown'. The conclusion is 'Zoning Law -> Reduce Carbon'.
Identifying the formal logic structure helps isolate the missing link, which is 'Slowdown -> Reduce Carbon'.
2
Analyze the infrastructure plan argument to trace the conditional chain.
Premises lead to 'Plan -> Loses Middle-Class Support'. Conclusion is 'Plan -> Not Approved'. The required gap is 'Loses Middle-Class Support -> Not Approved'.
Tracing the conditional chain reveals the exact premise required to link the end of the chain directly to the conclusion.
3
Evaluate the political ethics argument by utilizing contrapositives.
Premises yield 'Governor -> Not Ethical'. Conclusion is 'Governor -> Not Re-elected'. The missing link is 'Not Ethical -> Not Re-elected', which is logically equivalent to 'Re-elected -> Ethical'.
Sufficient assumptions frequently appear as the contrapositive of the direct logical gap.
4
Identify the quantifier required to fix the entrepreneur argument.
The premises state 'Most successful have failed' and 'John failed'. The conclusion 'John will be successful' requires the absolute universal rule that 'All who failed will be successful'.
Probabilistic or proportional premises ('most' or 'some') cannot guarantee a definite conclusion for a specific individual without a universal ('all' or 'every') assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Sufficient Assumptions
Soru 64Soru →

Wildlife ecologists monitoring the endangered silver-tufted macaque in the Valerius Basin have documented a severe population collapse over the last five years. During this exact same period, the region's population of non-native feral wildcats has nearly tripled. Because feral wildcats are known to hunt small primates in other ecosystems, the ecologists concluded that predation by these wildcats is the primary cause of the macaque population's decline.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The recent surge in the feral wildcat population was not fueled by scavenging on the remains of macaques that had died from an independent mass mortality event.

Cevap

The assumption that the wildcat population surge was not fueled by scavenging on macaques that died from an independent mass mortality event.
The ecologists observe a correlation (macaques decrease, wildcats increase) and conclude that wildcats hunting the macaques is the cause. However, a glaring alternative explanation exists: an independent event (like a virus) caused the macaques to die, and the wildcats experienced a population boom because they had a massive supply of macaque carcasses to scavenge. For the ecologists' conclusion to be logically sound, they must assume this alternative scenario did not happen. If we negate this correct option and assume the wildcats DID boom due to scavenging macaques killed by something else, the argument that predation caused the decline is completely destroyed.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument structure.
Premise: Macaque population collapsed at the exact same time the wildcat population tripled. Conclusion: Wildcat predation is the primary cause of the macaque decline.
Identifying the premises and conclusion is the necessary first step to evaluate the logical gap in any argument.
2
Identify the reasoning flaw.
The argument assumes causation based purely on correlation. It assumes A (wildcats) caused B (macaque decline), failing to consider reverse causality or a third variable.
Recognizing the causal flaw reveals what the author must assume (that alternative explanations are false).
3
Anticipate alternative explanations that fit the evidence.
An alternative explanation: A disease killed the macaques, and the wildcats' population tripled because they scavenged the abundant dead bodies.
A 'Defender' assumption works by explicitly ruling out a competing alternative explanation that would weaken the argument.
4
Apply the Negation Technique to the choices.
Negating the correct option reveals that if the wildcats merely scavenged macaques killed by something else, wildcat predation is not the cause of the decline, completely destroying the argument.
The Negation Technique is the definitive test for a Necessary Assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Ruling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender) - Causal Relationships
Soru 65Soru →

The city's transportation department plans to lower the speed limit on Highway 101 from 65 mph to 55 mph in order to reduce the number of accidents. This plan will achieve its goal, since driving at lower speeds provides drivers with more time to react to sudden hazards on the road.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: At least some drivers on Highway 101 will reduce their speed to comply with the new speed limit.

Cevap

The argument requires the assumption that at least some drivers will actually reduce their speed in response to the new limit.
The correct answer logically bridges the gap between changing a rule and actual real-world behavior. By applying the Negation Technique, we can test this: if we logically negate the statement to 'No drivers on Highway 101 will reduce their speed to comply with the new speed limit,' the argument's reasoning entirely falls apart. If speeds do not decrease, the drivers will not gain the extra reaction time the author explicitly relies upon, meaning the plan cannot achieve its goal. Because the argument cannot survive if this statement is false, it is a strictly required necessary assumption.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the core argument structure.
Premise: Driving at lower speeds gives more reaction time. Conclusion: Lowering the limit will reduce accidents.
Understanding the core premise and conclusion is strictly required before finding the missing logical link.
2
Spot the gap between the plan and the expected result.
The argument assumes that changing the legal limit on a sign will actually result in drivers lowering their physical driving speeds.
If the legal regulation does not alter real-world driver behavior, the premise about 'driving at lower speeds' becomes irrelevant.
3
Apply the Negation Technique to the correct option to verify.
Negating the correct option yields: 'No drivers will reduce their speed.' If true, no one gets more reaction time, and accidents will not be reduced. The argument collapses.
The Negation Technique is the definitive test for Necessary Assumption questions.

Anahtar Kavram

Applying the Negation Technique to test Necessary Assumptions
Tahmini Süre:1m 0s
Soru 66Soru →

Unless a species adapts to its changing environment, it will eventually face extinction. The red-eyed tree frog has successfully adapted to its changing environment. Therefore, the red-eyed tree frog will not face extinction.

Is the following statement true or false?
The argument relies on the assumption that adapting to a changing environment is sufficient to prevent a species from facing extinction.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True
The statement is true. The argument commits a conditional logic error by treating a necessary condition as a sufficient one. The premise states that without adaptation, extinction is guaranteed. The conclusion assumes that with adaptation, survival is guaranteed, meaning the author assumes adaptation is sufficient to prevent extinction.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Diagram the conditional premise.
Failure to adapt -> Extinction (which means: Avoid Extinction -> Adapt).
To understand the explicit logical constraints of the argument.
2
Diagram the conclusion.
Adapt -> Avoid Extinction.
To isolate the author's final claim.
3
Compare the premise to the conclusion to find the missing link.
The author reverses the premise's logic, treating the necessary condition (adaptation) as a sufficient condition.
To identify the exact assumption required for the argument to make sense.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying missing conditional links and the confusion of necessary and sufficient conditions.
Soru 67Soru →

Musicologist: The recent excavation of a fully intact, multi-keyboard hydraulis—a water organ—dating to the 2nd century BCE fundamentally challenges our timeline of musical history. Because playing the distinct keyboards of this instrument simultaneously requires the coordinated physical effort of at least three highly trained musicians, it is clear that polyphony—the practice of performing multiple independent melodic lines at once—was already an established art form during this ancient period.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The musicians operating the distinct keyboards of the hydraulis did not restrict their simultaneous playing to identical melodic sequences.

Cevap

The option stating that the musicians operating the distinct keyboards did not restrict their simultaneous playing to identical melodic sequences.
The correct answer bridges the logical gap between 'multiple musicians playing simultaneously' and 'polyphony' by eliminating a scenario that would ruin the argument. If we apply the Negation Technique and assume the logical opposite—that the musicians DID restrict their playing to identical melodic sequences—then they were playing in unison (monophony). If they were playing in unison, the fact that three musicians were required no longer serves as evidence for polyphony, and the conclusion collapses entirely.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that polyphony (performing multiple independent melodic lines at once) was an established art form during the 2nd century BCE.
Understanding the exact claim being made is crucial for evaluating what the argument must assume.
2
Identify the premise supporting the conclusion.
The premise is that playing the distinct keyboards of the 2nd century BCE hydraulis requires at least three highly trained musicians.
This establishes the evidence used to reach the conclusion and highlights the logical gap.
3
Identify the logical gap between the premise and conclusion.
The argument assumes that multiple musicians playing keyboards simultaneously equates to them playing multiple independent melodic lines (polyphony).
The presence of multiple musicians does not inherently guarantee polyphony; they could be doing something else, such as playing the same notes.
4
Apply the Negation Technique to the answer choices to find the necessary assumption.
Negating the correct option yields: 'The musicians DID restrict their simultaneous playing to identical melodic sequences.' If they played the exact same sequence (unison), they were not playing independent lines, destroying the evidence for polyphony.
A necessary assumption is one that, if proven false, causes the argument to logically collapse.

Anahtar Kavram

Applying the Negation Technique to Necessary Assumptions
Soru 68Soru →

Political theorist: A political revolution can be successful only if it has the broad support of the working class. However, a revolution cannot garner broad working-class support unless its leaders clearly articulate a tangible economic benefit to the public. Therefore, the recent uprising in the southern province will definitely not be a successful political revolution.

Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the argument's conclusion to be properly drawn?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The leaders of the recent uprising in the southern province failed to clearly articulate a tangible economic benefit to the public.

Cevap

The leaders of the recent uprising in the southern province failed to clearly articulate a tangible economic benefit to the public.
The argument relies on a conditional chain: a revolution is successful only if it has broad support, and it has broad support only if leaders articulate an economic benefit (Successful -> Broad Support -> Articulate Benefit). The conclusion asserts that the recent uprising will not be successful. To logically guarantee this conclusion, we must trigger the contrapositive of the chain: if the leaders fail to articulate an economic benefit, the revolution will lack broad support and thus cannot be successful. The correct answer provides this exact missing trigger by stating the leaders failed to articulate the benefit.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the premises and their conditional relationships.
Premise 1: Successful Revolution -> Broad Working-Class Support. Premise 2: Broad Working-Class Support -> Articulate Economic Benefit.
Mapping the conditional statements is essential for finding the logical structure of the argument.
2
Combine the premises to form a logical chain.
Successful Revolution -> Broad Working-Class Support -> Articulate Economic Benefit.
Chaining the premises reveals the ultimate necessary conditions for a successful revolution.
3
Determine the contrapositive of the logical chain.
If leaders DO NOT articulate an economic benefit -> NO broad support -> NOT a successful revolution.
The conclusion asserts a negative outcome (the uprising will not be successful), so the contrapositive shows what triggers that specific outcome.
4
Identify the missing link required to logically guarantee the conclusion.
The argument concludes the recent uprising will NOT be successful. To prove this using the contrapositive chain, we must assume that the uprising's leaders failed to articulate a tangible economic benefit.
Adding this assumption triggers the contrapositive chain, which definitively proves the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Sufficient Assumptions and Contrapositives in Conditional Logic
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 69Soru →

Urban Historian: The city's waterfront warehouse district features a distinctive cast-iron architectural style that is no longer utilized in modern construction. Because it employs this obsolete style, the district serves as a tangible link to our region's industrial heritage. Therefore, the city council is obligated to pass legislation protecting the warehouse district from demolition.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The city council is obligated to pass protective legislation for any district that serves as a tangible link to the region's industrial heritage.

Cevap

The city council is obligated to pass protective legislation for any district that serves as a tangible link to the region's industrial heritage.
The argument's conclusion introduces a normative obligation ('obligated to pass legislation protecting') that does not appear anywhere in the premises. The premises only establish that the district 'serves as a tangible link to our region's industrial heritage.' To logically reach the conclusion, there must be a rule connecting this stated premise to the new normative obligation. The correct answer bridges this exact gap by stating that serving as a tangible link triggers the council's obligation to protect the district. If this statement is negated, the argument falls apart completely.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is: 'The city council is obligated to pass legislation protecting the warehouse district from demolition.'
Locating the conclusion isolates the specific claim that the premises must support.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
Premise 1: The district has an obsolete cast-iron style. Premise 2: Because of this obsolete style, the district serves as a tangible link to industrial heritage.
Understanding the evidence shows exactly what information is available to prove the conclusion.
3
Locate the conceptual gap ('rogue element') between the premises and the conclusion.
The concept of being 'obligated to pass legislation protecting' appears only in the conclusion. The premises only establish that the district is a 'tangible link to industrial heritage.'
A valid logical argument cannot introduce entirely new concepts in the conclusion without a premise linking them to the evidence.
4
Formulate the necessary supporter assumption to bridge the gap.
If something serves as a tangible link to the region's industrial heritage, then the city council is obligated to pass legislation protecting it.
This conditional statement connects the end of the premise chain directly to the new claim in the conclusion, making the argument logically sound.

Anahtar Kavram

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 70Soru →

Business Analyst: To increase productivity, TechCorp recently transitioned to a four-day workweek without reducing employee pay. Studies consistently show that employees who are well-rested make fewer errors and complete their assigned tasks significantly faster. Therefore, TechCorp's overall weekly output will certainly not decrease as a result of this schedule transition.

Which of the following statements must be assumed in order for the analyst's conclusion to be properly drawn? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The gains in efficiency resulting from employees being well-rested are large enough to prevent a decline in overall weekly output despite the reduction in working hours.; The transition to a four-day workweek will genuinely result in TechCorp employees being better rested than they were under the previous schedule.

Cevap

The statements indicating that the efficiency gains are large enough to offset lost hours, and that the employees will actually become better rested as a result of the transition.
For the analyst's argument to hold logically, two foundational bridges must be in place. First, the premise about 'well-rested employees' must actually apply to TechCorp's specific intervention, meaning the schedule change must genuinely result in employees becoming better rested. Second, because the company is intrinsically losing working hours, the efficiency gains generated from being well-rested must be substantial enough to fully mathematically offset that loss in time. If either of these conditions is proven false, the conclusion that overall output will not decrease is immediately destroyed.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument to identify its core components.
Premises: TechCorp reduced working days; well-rested employees work faster and make fewer errors. Conclusion: Overall weekly output will not decrease.
Understanding the exact structural flow allows you to spot logical gaps between the evidence provided and the claim made.
2
Identify the unstated logical gaps in the analyst's reasoning.
Gap 1: Does a four-day workweek automatically mean employees are better rested? Gap 2: Are the benefits of being rested mathematically enough to make up for losing 20% of the workweek?
Necessary assumptions always serve to bridge gaps in the reasoning or rule out factors that would instantly destroy the conclusion.
3
Apply the Negation Technique to the plausible answer choices.
Negating the statement about efficiency gains being large enough destroys the conclusion (if they aren't large enough, output falls). Negating the statement about employees becoming better rested also destroys the conclusion (the premise becomes irrelevant).
The defining characteristic of a necessary assumption is that the argument collapses if the assumption is proven false.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Necessary Assumptions via the Negation Technique

Alternatif Yöntem

Instead of predicting the gaps directly, you can strictly evaluate each choice by inserting the word 'not' into its main verb. If the newly negated sentence makes the author's conclusion impossible, you have found a necessary assumption.
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 71Soru →

Agronomist: The newly developed "Crimson" tomato cultivar has a significantly thicker skin than traditional heirloom varieties. Because of its thicker skin, the Crimson cultivar is far less susceptible to puncturing by standard agricultural harvesting machinery. Therefore, adopting the Crimson cultivar will lead to a more visually appealing crop at the local markets.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Puncturing by standard agricultural harvesting machinery diminishes the visual appeal of tomatoes.

Cevap

The correct assumption is that puncturing by standard agricultural harvesting machinery diminishes the visual appeal of tomatoes.
The correct answer identifies the unstated, necessary link between the premises and the conclusion. The premises establish that the Crimson cultivar is less likely to be punctured by machinery. The conclusion leaps to the claim that the Crimson cultivar will be more visually appealing. For the argument to be logically sound, there must be a connection between avoiding machinery punctures and possessing visual appeal. If puncturing does not negatively affect a tomato's visual appeal (applying the Negation Test), the conclusion entirely falls apart.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is: 'Adopting the Crimson cultivar will lead to a more visually appealing crop at the local markets.'
Finding the conclusion establishes the endpoint of the argument's logic.
2
Identify the premises provided to support this conclusion.
The premises are: 'Crimson has thicker skin' and 'Crimson is far less susceptible to puncturing by standard agricultural harvesting machinery.'
Understanding the evidence shows what foundation the author is building upon.
3
Identify the conceptual gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The premises discuss 'puncturing by machinery', but the conclusion introduces a new, 'rogue' concept: 'visually appealing crop'.
Recognizing a new term in the conclusion is the key to identifying a missing Supporter Assumption.
4
Formulate the missing link (the Supporter Assumption).
The argument must assume that there is a connection between machinery punctures and visual appeal, specifically that such punctures negatively affect visual appeal.
Without this link, the fact that the tomatoes avoid being punctured is irrelevant to how visually appealing they are.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying necessary Supporter Assumptions that bridge rogue concepts in the conclusion back to the premises.
Soru 72Soru →

Historian: For a historical preservation project to be considered culturally comprehensive, it must include structures where ordinary working-class people lived or worked. The proposed waterfront restoration initiative will refurbish only wealthy merchants' estates and former civic administrative centers. Consequently, the proposed waterfront restoration initiative cannot be considered a culturally comprehensive historical preservation project.

Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the conclusion to be properly drawn?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: None of the wealthy merchants' estates or former civic administrative centers were places where ordinary working-class people lived or worked.

Cevap

The statement establishing that neither the wealthy merchants' estates nor the civic administrative centers were places where ordinary working-class people lived or worked.
The argument establishes a strict necessary condition for a project to be culturally comprehensive: it must include structures where working-class people lived or worked (If Comprehensive → Includes Working-Class Structures). The initiative only includes wealthy merchants' estates and civic administrative centers. To guarantee the conclusion that the initiative is not culturally comprehensive, we must prove it fails the necessary condition. Assuming that none of the estates or civic centers were places where working-class people lived or worked completely bridges this gap. It proves the initiative fails the necessary condition, triggering the contrapositive (If No Working-Class Structures → Not Comprehensive).

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's main conclusion.
The proposed waterfront restoration initiative cannot be considered a culturally comprehensive historical preservation project.
This sets the target statement that the sufficient assumption must guarantee to be true.
2
Deconstruct the premises providing formal logical support.
Premise 1 establishes a requirement: Culturally Comprehensive → Includes working-class structures. Premise 2 states a fact: The initiative refurbishes ONLY wealthy merchants' estates and civic administrative centers.
Mapping the exact logical boundaries highlights what information is missing to force the conclusion.
3
Identify the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The argument assumes that by refurbishing ONLY estates and civic centers, the initiative fails the requirement of including working-class structures.
The conclusion relies on the unstated premise that estates and civic centers do not overlap with working-class structures. If they did, the initiative might still be comprehensive.
4
Select the option that acts as the missing formal link.
The correct option explicitly states that none of the estates or civic centers were places where working-class people lived or worked.
When this assumption is added, it proves mathematically that the initiative includes zero working-class structures, thereby violating the necessary condition and guaranteeing the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Sufficient Assumptions via Formal Logic and Conditional Bridging
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 73Soru →

Arrange the following statements to form a continuous logical chain that demonstrates how a sufficient assumption bridges the logical gap to justify the conclusion. The sequence must trace the conditional path from the initial trigger to the final outcome, ending with the main conclusion.

Öğeleri doğru sıraya koymak için sürükleyin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct logical order begins with the flat tax premise, moves to the simplified tax code intermediate premise, follows with the sufficient assumption about disposable income, and ends with the final conclusion.
A valid deductive argument using a sufficient assumption requires a closed logical loop. The correct sequence starts with the initial condition (flat tax), connects to the intermediate effect (simplified code), bridges to the final effect via the sufficient assumption (reduced reliance means more disposable income), and finally states the conclusion that logically follows from this chain.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion.
The statement starting with 'Therefore' is the conclusion and must be placed last.
Conclusions are derived from premises and assumptions, so they conclude the logical sequence.
2
Identify the starting premise.
The statement about 'Implementing a flat tax system' introduces the initial condition of the argument.
In a continuous logical chain, the sequence begins with the independent trigger condition.
3
Find the connecting intermediate premise.
The statement linking a 'simplified national tax code' to a reduction in 'reliance on professional tax preparation services' naturally follows the first premise.
This establishes the middle link of the conditional chain.
4
Identify the sufficient assumption.
The statement connecting the reduction in 'reliance on professional tax preparation services' to an 'increase in citizens' disposable income' acts as the assumption.
This assumption bridges the final logical gap, making the conclusion logically valid.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Sufficient Assumptions via Deductive Chains
Soru 74Soru →

Paleontologist: The extinction of the marine reptile *Thalassadon* was caused by a rapid global cooling event, rather than by a viral pandemic as some scientists have proposed. Fossil records clearly indicate that *Thalassadon* populations drastically plummeted in the higher, colder latitudes hundreds of thousands of years before they disappeared from the warmer equatorial waters.

Statement: The paleontologist's argument logically depends on the assumption that the proposed viral pandemic did not originate in the higher latitudes and slowly spread toward the equator.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True
The statement accurately identifies a necessary assumption. The argument attempts to dismiss the viral pandemic theory by pointing out that the extinction started in colder climates. For this evidence to successfully dismiss the viral theory, the author must assume that the virus itself wouldn't produce that exact same geographic pattern.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's conclusion and primary supporting evidence.
The conclusion is that global cooling, not a virus, caused the extinction. The evidence is that the extinction occurred in colder, higher latitudes long before it reached warmer, equatorial waters.
Deconstructing the argument structure is required to evaluate any logical assumption.
2
Apply the Negation Test to the candidate assumption in the statement.
The negated assumption is: 'The proposed viral pandemic DID originate in the higher latitudes and slowly spread toward the equator.'
The Negation Test determines if an assumption is logically necessary; if the negated version destroys the argument, the assumption is necessary.
3
Evaluate the impact of the negated assumption on the paleontologist's argument.
If the virus spread from higher latitudes to the equator, it perfectly explains the extinction timeline, invalidating the paleontologist's attempt to use that timeline as definitive proof for global cooling over a virus.
A defender assumption must protect the argument from an alternate explanation of the specific evidence presented.

Anahtar Kavram

Ruling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender Assumptions)
Soru 75Soru →

Some environmentalists argue that ecosystems possess intrinsic moral standing. However, attributing intrinsic moral standing to an entity requires that the entity possesses a subjective experiential perspective—that is, it must be capable of consciously experiencing well-being or suffering. Because ecosystems are decentralized networks of interactions rather than unified, sentient beings, they lack this capacity. Therefore, the preservation of ecosystems can only be ethically justified on the basis of their instrumental value to sentient creatures.

Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the conclusion to be properly drawn?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The preservation of an entity that lacks intrinsic moral standing can be ethically justified only on the basis of its instrumental value to sentient creatures.

Cevap

The statement asserting that for entities lacking intrinsic moral standing, instrumental value to sentient creatures is the exclusive ethical justification for their preservation.
To guarantee the conclusion, we need to bridge the gap between the intermediate conclusion ('ecosystems lack intrinsic moral standing') and the main conclusion ('the preservation of ecosystems can only be ethically justified on the basis of their instrumental value to sentient creatures'). The correct statement acts as a perfect conditional bridge: if an entity lacks intrinsic moral standing, its preservation can only be justified by its instrumental value. Since ecosystems lack intrinsic moral standing, the conclusion necessarily follows.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The preservation of ecosystems can only be ethically justified on the basis of their instrumental value to sentient creatures.
This is the final claim that the author is attempting to prove, signaled by 'Therefore'.
2
Identify the premises and intermediate conclusion.
Premise 1: Intrinsic moral standing (IMS) requires a subjective experiential perspective (SEP). Premise 2: Ecosystems lack SEP. Intermediate Conclusion: Ecosystems lack IMS.
Breaking down the argument's structure reveals the established facts and the logical chain leading up to the logical gap.
3
Identify the logical gap between the intermediate conclusion and the main conclusion.
The argument establishes that ecosystems lack intrinsic moral standing, but jumps to a conclusion about what can justify their preservation.
A sufficient assumption must logically connect the end of the premise chain (lacking IMS) to the new concept introduced in the conclusion (exclusive justification via instrumental value).
4
Formulate the sufficient assumption.
If an entity lacks IMS, its preservation can only be justified by its instrumental value to sentient creatures.
Adding this conditional statement to the intermediate conclusion yields the main conclusion with 100% logical certainty.

Anahtar Kavram

Sufficient Assumptions (Bridging Intermediate Conclusions)
Soru 76Soru →

Marine Biologist: The population of the reef-dwelling clown triggerfish has declined significantly over the past decade. Some conservationists attribute this to increased commercial fishing in the area. However, recent data shows that the population of predatory grouper, which primarily feed on juvenile clown triggerfish, has doubled during the same period. Since commercial fishing operations in this region primarily target tuna and completely ignore grouper, it is clear that the grouper population explosion, rather than commercial fishing, is responsible for the decline of the clown triggerfish.

Which of the following statements, if logically negated, would fatally undermine the marine biologist's conclusion? (Select all that apply)

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The methods used by commercial tuna fishers have not inadvertently eliminated the natural predators of the grouper.; The commercial fishing operations targeting tuna do not result in significant bycatch of clown triggerfish.

Cevap

The correct statements are the ones indicating that commercial tuna fishers have not eliminated the grouper's natural predators, and that commercial fishing operations do not result in significant bycatch of clown triggerfish.
The argument explicitly concludes that the grouper, rather than commercial fishing, is responsible for the decline. For this causal conclusion to hold, the author must assume that commercial fishing is not the hidden root cause of the grouper explosion itself, and that commercial fishing is not secretly depleting the triggerfish through untargeted bycatch. Negating these specific statements reveals scenarios where commercial fishing is ultimately to blame, thereby logically destroying the author's conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's core structure.
Conclusion: Grouper, rather than commercial fishing, is responsible for the decline. Premises: Grouper population doubled and they eat triggerfish; commercial fishing targets tuna and ignores grouper.
Understanding the precise causal claim (A caused the problem, not B) is necessary before evaluating assumptions.
2
Apply the Negation Technique to each option.
Mentally reverse the logical meaning of each statement to see how it impacts the argument when proven false.
A necessary assumption is one that, if proven false, causes the argument's conclusion to collapse.
3
Evaluate the negated statements against the conclusion.
Negating the correct options shows scenarios where commercial fishing is either the direct cause (bycatch) or the indirect root cause (eliminating grouper predators). Both scenarios destroy the conclusion.
If commercial fishing is the true cause, the conclusion that it is 'rather than commercial fishing' is fatally undermined.

Anahtar Kavram

Applying the Negation Technique to Causal Assumptions
Soru 77Soru →

Botanist: The rare *Silene* flower requires extended periods of freezing temperatures followed immediately by heavy rainfall in order to bloom. The university's climate-controlled greenhouse is incapable of simulating heavy rainfall and cannot reach freezing temperatures. Therefore, if our research team is to successfully observe the *Silene* flower's blooming phase, we will be forced to conduct our research in the Torngat Mountains, and we will need to drastically reduce our laboratory budget.

Which of the following statements function as supporter assumptions that are logically required for the botanist's conclusion to be properly drawn? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The Torngat Mountains are the only location available to the research team where the *Silene* flower can be exposed to the specific sequence of freezing temperatures and heavy rainfall.; Conducting field research in the Torngat Mountains entails costs that cannot be accommodated without drastically reducing the research team's laboratory budget.

Cevap

The statements that link the required weather conditions exclusively to the Torngat Mountains, and link the Torngat Mountains expedition to the necessary reduction of the laboratory budget.
The argument's conclusion introduces two entirely new elements that do not appear in the premises: a specific geographic location (the Torngat Mountains) and a financial consequence (drastically reducing the laboratory budget). For the conclusion to be logically drawn, two supporter assumptions are required. First, there must be a bridge connecting the required weather conditions to the Torngat Mountains (they must be the only available place with these conditions, otherwise the team isn't 'forced' to go there). Second, there must be a bridge connecting the expedition to the financial consequence (the trip must cause the budget reduction, otherwise the reduction isn't strictly necessary).

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the core premises of the argument.
Premise 1: Blooming requires freezing + heavy rain. Premise 2: The greenhouse cannot provide freezing or heavy rain.
Understanding the established facts is necessary before identifying what is missing.
2
Identify the main conclusion.
Conclusion: To observe the bloom, the team MUST go to the Torngat Mountains AND MUST drastically reduce the laboratory budget.
The conclusion contains the 'rogue' elements that the supporter assumptions must bridge.
3
Locate the logical gaps between the premises and the conclusion.
Gap 1: Moving from 'need specific weather' to 'must go to Torngat Mountains'. Gap 2: Moving from 'going to Torngat Mountains' to 'must reduce laboratory budget'.
Supporter assumptions function by explicitly connecting new conclusion concepts back to the established premise framework.
4
Apply the Negation Test to potential assumptions to verify they are strictly required.
Negating Gap 1 ('Torngat is NOT the only available location') destroys the claim that they are forced to go there. Negating Gap 2 ('The trip does NOT require reducing the budget') destroys the claim that they must reduce the budget.
The Negation Test definitively separates logically required assumptions from statements that merely strengthen the argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions in Compound Conclusions
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 78Soru →

For each of the arguments below, identify the assumption that strictly guarantees its conclusion. Pair each logical argument (left) with its corresponding sufficient assumption (right).

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Premise: Mitigation of the current structural deficit is achievable only if a policy stimulates emerging export markets. The newly implemented tariff regime severely restricts bilateral trade agreements.
Conclusion: The new tariff regime will fail to mitigate the current structural deficit.
Premise: A normative framework possesses practical viability only when it provides unambiguous behavioral directives during moral crises. Virtue ethics is fundamentally predicated upon the subjective interpretation of an agent's character.
Conclusion: Virtue ethics lacks practical viability as a normative framework.
Premise: To classify a behavioral trait as a primary evolutionary adaptation, the trait must have demonstrably augmented reproductive fitness during the Pleistocene epoch. Widespread human altruism toward out-group members often endangers the survival of the altruist.
Conclusion: Widespread human altruism toward out-group members cannot be classified as a primary evolutionary adaptation.
Premise: An archaeological artifact retains definitive historical utility if and only if its precise chronological origin can be verified through radio-isotopic dating. The recently unearthed Sumerian tablets were subjected to heavy contamination by modern groundwater.
Conclusion: The recently unearthed Sumerian tablets have lost their definitive historical utility.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The policy argument matches the trade restriction assumption; the ethics argument matches the subjective interpretation assumption; the biology argument matches the survival endangerment assumption; and the history argument matches the groundwater contamination assumption.
Each correct pairing provides the exact conditional bridge necessary to trigger the contrapositive of the first premise. For example, in the policy argument, mitigating the deficit requires stimulating export markets. Since the tariff restricts trade, we must assume that restricting trade PREVENTS stimulating export markets. This triggers the failure condition, guaranteeing the conclusion that the deficit cannot be mitigated.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the formal structure of all arguments.
Each argument follows the structure: X requires Y. Subject Z possesses trait W. Conclusion: Subject Z is not X.
Identifying the underlying conditional logic reveals exactly what is missing to deduce the conclusion.
2
Identify the logical gap in each argument.
To reach the conclusion mathematically, we must trigger the contrapositive of the first premise (Not Y -> Not X). Therefore, the gap is always 'Trait W guarantees Not Y'.
A sufficient assumption must leave no room for alternative possibilities; it must force the necessary condition to fail.
3
Select the assumption that bridges Trait W to Not Y for each context.
The correct matches seamlessly connect the new premise (W) to the negation of the required condition (Y) within their respective domains.
This guarantees 100% deductive closure for each specific argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying sufficient assumptions via contrapositive deductive closures in formal logic.
Tahmini Süre:2m 30s
Soru 79Soru →

City Planner: To alleviate traffic congestion on the downtown bridge, the city council should implement a dynamic toll system that charges higher fees during peak commuting hours. A recent trial of a similar dynamic toll system on the primary highway of the neighboring city of Oakville resulted in a 20% reduction in peak-hour traffic volume within three months. Thus, our implementation of this system will successfully reduce peak-hour traffic on the downtown bridge.

Which of the following statements are necessary assumptions upon which the city planner's argument depends? (Select all that apply)

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The commuters who currently use the downtown bridge during peak hours have viable alternatives to paying the higher toll, such as different routes or adjusted travel schedules.; The reduction in peak-hour traffic on Oakville's primary highway was not primarily caused by an event independent of the toll system, such as a localized economic downturn.

Cevap

The necessary assumptions are that commuters have viable alternatives to paying the toll, and that Oakville's traffic reduction was not caused by an independent event.
The argument depends on two critical assumptions. First, it assumes that local commuters have the flexibility to avoid the toll (viable alternatives); otherwise, they would simply pay the fee and traffic would remain identical. Second, because the argument relies on Oakville as its sole causal evidence, it must assume that Oakville's traffic reduction was actually caused by the toll, not by an independent factor like an economic downturn.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the core components of the argument.
Premise: Oakville reduced traffic by 20% after implementing a dynamic toll. Conclusion: A similar toll will reduce traffic on the downtown bridge.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to spot logical gaps.
2
Determine the logical gaps in the reasoning.
The argument assumes the two cities are analogous (commuters can change habits) and that the toll actually caused the reduction in Oakville.
Identifying missing links reveals potential necessary assumptions.
3
Apply the Negation Test to evaluate the options.
Negating the statement about viable alternatives means commuters must drive anyway, preventing traffic reduction. Negating the statement about Oakville's independent event severs the causal link in the premise.
A statement is a necessary assumption if its negation destroys the argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Necessary Assumptions (Defender and Supporter)
Soru 80Soru →

An environmental economist observed that cities implementing a 'green canopy' initiative—planting shade trees along commercial corridors—experienced a 15% higher increase in local retail revenue over five years compared to cities without the initiative. The economist concluded that the presence of the green canopy directly stimulated local consumer spending.

Match each potential explanatory objection (left) with the specific 'defender assumption' (right) that the economist's argument must make to effectively neutralize that objection.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Retail areas already experiencing significant economic booms were much more likely to have the surplus tax revenue required to invest in aesthetic improvements like green canopies.
The state offered commercial revitalization grants that mandated tree planting, but these grants also heavily funded massive advertising campaigns for the local businesses.
The pilot program for the green canopy initiative exclusively selected cities that had recently completed multi-million-dollar modernizations of their shopping districts.
The retail revenue data for cities without the green canopy included vast industrial zones with no retail presence, artificially suppressing their average revenue figures.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The reverse causality objection matches with the assumption that commercial prosperity was not a prerequisite. The third-variable confound (advertising) matches with the assumption that promotional subsidies weren't the sole cause. The selection bias objection matches the assumption that entry wasn't restricted to upgraded locales. The data measurement flaw matches the assumption that non-commercial sectors didn't skew the comparative metrics.
Each correct pair accurately maps a specific vulnerability in causal reasoning to the precise negative statement (defender assumption) required to close that vulnerability. An argument concluding X causes Y must assume Y did not cause X, an outside factor Z did not cause Y, the sample exhibiting X was not inherently biased to show Y, and the baseline data for the absence of X was not artificially skewed.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the causal relationship proposed in the stimulus.
The author argues that Green Canopies (Cause) led to increased Retail Revenue (Effect) based on a comparative correlation.
Identifying the core causal claim is necessary to understand how alternative explanations might attack it.
2
Evaluate the first objection (reverse causality) and find its logical defense.
The objection stating economic booms funded the trees is neutralized by the assumption that commercial prosperity was not a prerequisite for the arboricultural projects.
A defender assumption must explicitly deny that the proposed effect actually caused the proposed cause.
3
Evaluate the second objection (third variable) and find its logical defense.
The objection regarding parallel advertising campaigns is neutralized by the assumption that promotional subsidies did not single-handedly generate the uplift.
To defend a causal claim, the argument must assume that known concurrent events did not independently produce the observed effect.
4
Evaluate the third objection (selection bias) and find its logical defense.
The objection that only newly modernized districts were selected is neutralized by the assumption that entry criteria did not restrict participation to such upgraded locales.
If the sample was cherry-picked for success, the cause is confounded; the defender assumes no such bias exists.
5
Evaluate the fourth objection (measurement flaw) and find its logical defense.
The objection that industrial zones suppressed control group data is neutralized by the assumption that metrics did not disproportionately incorporate non-commercial sectors.
Defending against a flawed baseline comparison requires assuming the control group metrics were validly measured.

Anahtar Kavram

Ruling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender Assumptions)
ÖncekiSayfa 4 / 11Sonraki
Assumptions Alıştırma Soruları — LSAT — Sayfa 4 | Examkin