Logical Reasoning

666 soru

Soru 581Soru →

An academic policy review board is analyzing four distinct arguments to evaluate their underlying deductive forms and fallacies. Match each argument with the statement that accurately characterizes its logical structure or reasoning error.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Any municipal transit expansion that successfully mitigates downtown traffic congestion requires dedicated bus rapid transit lanes. The proposed crosstown transit expansion includes dedicated bus rapid transit lanes. Therefore, the crosstown transit expansion will definitely mitigate downtown traffic congestion.
Every regional historical archive that receives state preservation funding must employ a full-time certified archivist. The maritime records repository does not employ a full-time certified archivist. Thus, the maritime records repository does not receive state preservation funding.
Most municipal botanical conservatories that installed automated drip-irrigation systems reduced their seasonal water consumption. Furthermore, all conservatories that reduced their seasonal water consumption qualified for regional environmental stewardship grants. Consequently, some municipal botanical conservatories that installed automated drip-irrigation systems qualified for regional environmental stewardship grants.
Whenever a biomedical clinical trial adheres strictly to double-blind randomized control protocols, its published results are reproducible. The recent pharmacological trial on novel antihypertensive compounds failed to adhere strictly to double-blind randomized control protocols. Hence, the published results of this pharmacological trial are not reproducible.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The municipal transit argument matches the description of treating a necessary condition as sufficient; the historical archive argument matches the valid contrapositive deduction; the botanical conservatory argument matches the valid quantifier overlap; and the biomedical trial argument matches the error of inferring the absence of an outcome from the failure of a sufficient condition.
Each argument is paired with the exact formal logical principle governing its deduction: the transit argument mistakenly treats a necessary condition as sufficient; the archive argument executes a logically sound contrapositive deduction; the conservatory argument demonstrates a valid quantifier chain establishing that some members share a downstream property; and the clinical trial argument fallaciously presumes that failing to satisfy one sufficient condition precludes the result from occurring through other means.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Isolate and diagram the conditional or quantifier logic of each argument stimulus.
Argument 1: Mitigation →\rightarrow Dedicated Lanes; Dedicated Lanes; therefore Mitigation (Fallacy: Affirming Consequent). Argument 2: Funding →\rightarrow Archivist; No Archivist; therefore No Funding (Valid: Modus Tollens). Argument 3: Most Systems →\rightarrow Reduced Water; All Reduced Water →\rightarrow Grants; therefore Some Systems →\rightarrow Grants (Valid: Quantifier Syllogism). Argument 4: Protocol →\rightarrow Reproducible; No Protocol; therefore Not Reproducible (Fallacy: Denying Antecedent).
Extracting abstract logical structures eliminates distracting surface details and reveals structural validity or fallacies.
2
Evaluate the abstract descriptions in the matching pool against the formal skeleton of each argument.
Each argument maps uniquely to its corresponding abstract definition based on necessary/sufficient conditions and quantifier relations.
Matching structural components ensures exact correspondence in modal certainty, quantifier scope, and deductive validity.

Anahtar Kavram

Parallel structural and flaw analysis in formal conditional and quantifier logic
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 582Soru →

Organizational Sociologist: Over the past decade, corporations that transitioned to a "flat" organizational structure—eliminating middle-management tiers to foster direct communication between executives and frontline employees—have reported, on average, a 22 percent higher profit margin than competitors retaining traditional hierarchies. Therefore, it is clear that removing middle management directly enhances a corporation's profitability by accelerating the pace of strategic decision-making.

Which one of the following, if true, most strongly supports the organizational sociologist's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Corporations that eliminated middle-management tiers but subsequently mandated highly bureaucratic, time-consuming executive review protocols for all new initiatives did not experience any increase in profit margins.

Cevap

The correct answer is the option establishing that flat corporations which implemented time-consuming review protocols (failing to accelerate decision-making) did not experience increased profits.
The argument posits a specific causal chain: removing middle management leads to accelerated strategic decision-making, which in turn leads to higher profitability. A common vulnerability in this type of causal claim is that an alternative factor—such as the massive financial savings from eliminating middle managers' salaries—might actually be responsible for the increased profit. The correct answer strengthens the argument by isolating the proposed mechanism. By demonstrating that flat organizations that failed to accelerate their decision-making (due to rigorous review protocols) did not see the profit increase, it effectively rules out salary savings as the primary cause and confirms that the pace of decision-making is the true driver of the increased profitability.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's core causal claim.
The sociologist argues that a flat organizational structure causes higher profits specifically because it accelerates strategic decision-making.
Understanding the exact mechanism proposed is essential for strengthening the argument.
2
Anticipate potential weaknesses or alternative explanations in the causal chain.
The increased profit might simply be the result of saving money by not paying middle managers' salaries, rather than the speed of decision-making.
A strong strengthener often eliminates a plausible alternative explanation.
3
Evaluate the options to find one that supports the specific mechanism.
The correct option shows that when the proposed mechanism (accelerated decision-making) is blocked by bureaucratic protocols, the effect (higher profits) disappears.
This confirms that the speed of decision-making, not just salary savings, is the crucial factor driving profitability.

Anahtar Kavram

Causal Reasoning and Isolating Mechanisms
Tahmini Süre:1m 45s
Soru 583Soru →

Geochemist: Most mineral deposits formed during the Cryogenian period contain anomalous isotopic ratios of iron. Furthermore, every rock formation containing anomalous isotopic ratios of iron resists chemical weathering when exposed to acidic groundwater. The bedrock specimen recently excavated from the valley floor strongly resists chemical weathering from acidic groundwater. Thus, the specimen was probably formed during the Cryogenian period.

Which of the following arguments displays a flawed pattern of reasoning most similar to that in the geochemist's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Urban Planner: Most historic district commercial buildings designed in the Art Deco style incorporate decorative terrazzo flooring. In addition, any building that incorporates decorative terrazzo flooring requires specialized seismic retrofitting during structural renovations. The municipal hall under renovation requires specialized seismic retrofitting. Therefore, the municipal hall was probably designed in the Art Deco style.

Cevap

The argument presented by the urban planner concluding that the municipal hall was probably designed in the Art Deco style.
The correct argument replicates the underlying deductive skeleton and specific logical defect. The stimulus reasons from 'Most A are B' and 'All B are C' (implying Most A are C) and illicitly infers that an individual exhibiting property C is probably an instance of A. The urban planner argument mirrors this exact progression: 'Most Art Deco buildings have terrazzo floors' and 'All buildings with terrazzo floors require seismic retrofits' (implying Most Art Deco buildings require seismic retrofits), concluding from the fact that a municipal hall requires seismic retrofits that it was probably designed in the Art Deco style.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Abstract the logical structure and quantifier strength of the stimulus premises
Premise 1: Most A are B. Premise 2: All B are C. Valid deduction from premises: Most A are C.
Quantifier logic allows combining 'Most A are B' and 'All B are C' into 'Most A are C'.
2
Identify the logical flaw committed in reaching the conclusion
Premise 3: Object X is C. Conclusion: Therefore, X is probably A.
The author affirms the consequent / confuses necessary and sufficient conditions: knowing that Most A are C does not mean that an entity possessing property C is likely to be A.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to locate the isomorphic structure and matching modal certainty
The urban planner argument has: Most Art Deco [A] have terrazzo flooring [B]; All terrazzo [B] require seismic retrofitting [C]; Municipal hall has seismic retrofitting [C]; Therefore, municipal hall is probably Art Deco [probably A].
This reproduces the exact premise quantifier balance ('most' + 'all') and the exact formal fallacy leading to a probabilistic conclusion ('probably').

Anahtar Kavram

Parallel Flaw Analysis: Quantifier Syllogism and Affirming the Consequent
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 584Soru →

Consider the following argument:

Cognitive Neuroscientist: Some researchers claim that rapid eye movement (REM) sleep is the primary phase responsible for long-term declarative memory consolidation. However, this view fails to account for recent optogenetic experiments. In those experiments, selectively suppressing non-REM slow-wave oscillations in mice completely blocked hippocampal-to-cortical information transfer, whereas suppressing REM theta rhythms caused no measurable memory deficit. Thus, non-REM slow-wave activity is the crucial neural mechanism for declarative memory consolidation. Therefore, clinical developers targeting memory-loss pathologies should focus their interventions on restoring slow-wave sleep architecture rather than REM sleep.

Based on the argument above, arrange the following statements in order of structural logical dependency, from the foundational premise (basic evidence) through the intermediate conclusion to the overall main conclusion.

Öğeleri doğru sıraya koymak için sürükleyin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The statements in order of logical dependency are: first, the experimental observation regarding optogenetic suppression of slow-wave oscillations versus theta rhythms (foundational premise); second, the claim that non-REM slow-wave activity is the crucial mechanism for consolidation (intermediate conclusion); and third, the recommendation that therapeutic development should prioritize restoring slow-wave architecture (overall main conclusion).
In this argument, the empirical finding from optogenetic experiments serves as the base premise. From this experimental finding, the author deduces an intermediate conclusion regarding the neural mechanism of memory consolidation (marked by 'Thus'). That mechanistic intermediate conclusion then serves as the essential reason supporting the author's final prescriptive recommendation (marked by 'Therefore'), establishing a clear linear dependency chain from basic premise to subsidiary conclusion to main conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the foundational evidence (unargued premise)
The observation that suppressing non-REM slow-wave oscillations blocked transfer while suppressing REM theta rhythms did not is presented as raw empirical data without supporting arguments.
Foundational premises provide the evidential base and do not depend logically on other claims in the argument.
2
Identify the intermediate (subsidiary) conclusion
The claim that non-REM slow-wave activity is the crucial neural mechanism is introduced with the indicator 'Thus' and follows logically from the experimental results, while serving to justify the subsequent recommendation.
An intermediate conclusion receives support from initial premises and simultaneously lends logical support to the final conclusion.
3
Identify the primary (main) conclusion
The claim that clinical developers should focus interventions on restoring slow-wave sleep architecture is introduced with 'Therefore' and represents the ultimate takeaway of the neuroscientist's reasoning.
The main conclusion is the terminal point of the argument's inferential chain and is not used to support any further claims.

Anahtar Kavram

Structural dependency and hierarchical roles in multi-step arguments
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 585Soru →

Paleoecologist: Fossilized molars of late Pleistocene steppe bison reveal a pronounced decrease in microscopic enamel striations beginning roughly 20,000 years ago. Because abrasive silica phytoliths in steppe grasses cause heavy tooth wear, some researchers concluded that a severe drought forced the bison to alter their diet from rough grasses to softer shrubs. However, soil isotope samples from that period establish that grass abundance did not decline. Therefore, the decrease in striations was instead caused by deeper winter snowpack, which prevented the bison from grazing down to the soil-covered bases of the grass stems where gritty mineral dust accumulates.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the paleoecologist's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Contemporary bison grazing in areas with deep winter snowpack feed almost exclusively on the exposed upper blades of grasses and exhibit significantly less tooth enamel wear than bison grazing on the same grasses in snow-free areas.

Cevap

The argument is most strengthened by the finding that contemporary bison in deep snowpack feed only on upper grass blades and show significantly less tooth wear than bison eating identical grasses in snow-free areas.
The correct answer provides direct empirical support for the author's causal model by showing that when bison graze under deep snowpack, their feeding is restricted to the upper parts of the plants and results in significantly less tooth wear than when grazing on the same grasses without snow. This verifies that snowpack can indeed produce the reduction in striations observed in the fossil record.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the stimulus structure and identify the conclusion and evidence.
The author concludes that reduced dental striations were caused by deep snowpack preventing bison from eating gritty, soil-covered stem bases, relying on evidence that grasses remained abundant despite a drop in wear.
Isolating the specific causal hypothesis is required to determine what evidence would substantiate it.
2
Identify the unstated assumption and logical gap in the causal claim.
The argument assumes that grazing restricted to upper grass blades due to snow cover actually leads to a measurable reduction in dental wear compared to grazing in low-snow conditions.
Strengthening an argument requires finding a claim that validates the causal mechanism or rules out confounding factors.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find the statement that substantiates this causal connection.
Evidence demonstrating that modern bison under similar deep-snow conditions exhibit less enamel wear on identical grasses directly confirms the proposed causal mechanism.
Showing that the hypothesized cause produces the observed effect in an analogous modern setting provides strong supportive evidence.

Anahtar Kavram

Validating a causal mechanism by demonstrating that the cause produces the observed effect under analogous conditions
Tahmini Süre:1m 15s
Soru 586Soru →

Environmental Scientist: Every wetland restoration project that successfully reestablishes native peat moss receives a regional conservation certification. Furthermore, all projects that receive a regional conservation certification qualify for priority public endowment funding. The Blackwood Bog project did not successfully reestablish native peat moss. Thus, the Blackwood Bog project does not qualify for priority public endowment funding.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Every commercial building that incorporates passive solar ventilation earns a high-efficiency designation. Moreover, any building that earns a high-efficiency designation is exempt from the municipal carbon levy. The Crestview Office Complex did not incorporate passive solar ventilation. Hence, the Crestview Office Complex is not exempt from the municipal carbon levy.

Cevap

The argument concerning the Crestview Office Complex and passive solar ventilation
The correct answer exhibits the identical structural flaw found in the stimulus. The stimulus establishes a conditional chain (Peat moss -> Certification -> Priority funding) and invalidly concludes that the absence of the initial condition (Peat moss) guarantees the absence of the end condition (Priority funding). Similarly, the correct argument establishes a conditional chain (Passive solar -> High-efficiency -> Carbon levy exemption) and invalidly concludes that the absence of the initial condition (Passive solar) guarantees the absence of the end condition (Carbon levy exemption). Both commit the formal fallacy of denying the antecedent across two universal conditional premises.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Abstract the logical structure of the stimulus argument
Premise 1: If P, then Q. Premise 2: If Q, then R. Premise 3: Not P for entity X. Conclusion: Therefore, not R for entity X.
Identifying the formal symbolic skeleton reveals the exact fallacy committed.
2
Diagnose the specific logical flaw in the stimulus
The argument chains two conditional statements (P -> Q -> R) and then commits the fallacy of Mistaken Negation (denying the antecedent) by asserting that because entity X lacks the sufficient condition P, it must also lack the necessary condition R.
A parallel flaw question requires finding an answer choice with the exact same structural defect.
3
Evaluate the answer choices against the target template
The argument regarding the commercial building follows the exact form: (Solar -> Designation), (Designation -> Exemption), (Not Solar for Crestview), concluding (Not Exempt for Crestview).
This reproduces the two universal conditional premises and the invalid inference based on denying the sufficient condition.

Anahtar Kavram

Parallel Flaw: Mistaken Negation across a Conditional Chain
Tahmini Süre:1m 25s
Soru 587Soru →

Acoustics Consultant: Every concert hall designed for unamplified orchestral performances is required to have a reverberation time of at least two seconds. The newly renovated municipal auditorium has a reverberation time of 2.2 seconds. Thus, the municipal auditorium must have been designed for unamplified orchestral performances.

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: Every certified organic vineyard in the valley is required to use a drip irrigation system. The hillside vineyard owned by the agricultural cooperative uses a drip irrigation system. Thus, the cooperative's hillside vineyard must be a certified organic vineyard.

Cevap

The argument concluding that the cooperative's hillside vineyard must be certified organic because it uses a drip irrigation system exhibits the identical pattern of flawed reasoning.
The correct argument replicates the exact formal structure and flaw of the stimulus: it establishes a conditional rule that all members of a category require a specific feature (All A require B), observes that an individual entity possesses that required feature (X has B), and invalidly concludes that the entity must belong to that category (therefore, X is A). This treats a necessary condition as though it were sufficient.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the formal logical structure of the stimulus argument.
Premise 1: Designed for unamplified orchestral performances (A) -> Reverberation time of at least two seconds (B). Premise 2: Municipal auditorium has B. Conclusion: Municipal auditorium is A.
Deconstructing the argument into abstract conditional terms clarifies the exact logical flaw.
2
Identify the underlying logical flaw in the stimulus.
Mistaken Reversal (Affirming the Consequent / Confusing a necessary condition with a sufficient condition).
Having a reverberation time of two seconds is a necessary requirement for concert halls, but satisfying this requirement alone does not guarantee that a facility was designed for that purpose.
3
Evaluate the choices to locate an argument with the identical quantifier strength, modal certainty, and conditional flaw.
The argument about the organic vineyard matches the structure: All Certified Organic (A) -> Drip Irrigation (B); Hillside Vineyard has B; Therefore, Hillside Vineyard is A.
Only this option exhibits an exact structural isomorphism of affirming the consequent with universal quantifiers.

Anahtar Kavram

Parallel Flaw: Mistaken Reversal (Affirming the Consequent)
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 588Soru →

The Heritage Preservation Board rejected a proposal by the historic Symphony Hall to replace its drafty, century-old timber-framed windows with modern, highly insulating composite replicas. Although the board conceded that the replacement would drastically reduce heating expenses and carbon emissions without altering the building's exterior color scheme, it maintained that authentic structural materials of a landmark must not be discarded if they can be repaired, even at greater financial and environmental expense.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the Heritage Preservation Board’s decision?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: An alteration to a historic landmark that replaces authentic physical elements should not be approved if the original elements are capable of being restored, regardless of any resulting operational efficiencies.

Cevap

An alteration to a historic landmark that replaces authentic physical elements should not be approved if the original elements are capable of being restored, regardless of any resulting operational efficiencies.
The argument concludes that the Symphony Hall's proposal should be rejected because its century-old timber windows can still be repaired, even though replacement would lower heating costs and emissions. The correct principle provides a universal rule: when original landmark elements can be restored, replacements should not be approved despite operational advantages. Applying this rule to the stimulus facts guarantees the board's conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the stimulus argument to identify the core premises and conclusion.
Premise: Original timber window frames can be repaired, but repairing them costs more and causes higher carbon emissions than composite replacements. Conclusion: The proposal to replace the original timber frames with composite replicas must be rejected.
Principle-Justify questions require identifying the underlying gap between the factual evidence and the normative judgment.
2
Determine the conditional link required to validate the conclusion from the premises.
The argument requires a rule stating that if original components can be restored/repaired, replacing them with non-original materials is prohibited, even if replacement offers superior economic or environmental performance.
The correct principle must provide a sufficient bridge from 'repairable original materials exist' to 'do not permit replacement'.
3
Evaluate the answer choices against the required conditional relationship and scope.
The statement specifying that alterations replacing authentic physical elements should not be approved if the original elements can be restored matches the exact scope and direction of the board's reasoning.
This establishes a sufficient condition that strictly justifies the board's decision without introducing unwarranted extreme claims or conditional reversals.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying a governing normative principle that bridges the gap between factual premises regarding material restoration and an administrative decision to deny a modernization permit.
Tahmini Süre:1m 15s
Soru 589Soru →

Paleoclimatologist: Amber—fossilized tree resin—often contains trapped microscopic air bubbles. Analysis of these bubbles in amber from the mid-Cretaceous period reveals an absolute concentration of argon-40 that is vastly higher than that found in the modern atmosphere. On Earth, argon-40 is almost exclusively produced by the radioactive decay of potassium-40 in the crust, and it enters the atmosphere primarily through tectonic outgassing. Because the mid-Cretaceous was an era of unprecedented continental rifting, the elevated argon-40 levels in these amber bubbles must be the result of a massive global spike in tectonic outgassing during that epoch.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The amount of argon-40 present in the trapped air bubbles was not significantly augmented by the decay of potassium-40 within the amber or its surrounding sediments after fossilization.

Cevap

The assumption that the argon-40 levels in the trapped air bubbles were not significantly augmented by local radioactive decay after the amber fossilized.
The argument concludes that a global atmospheric event (massive tectonic outgassing) caused the extremely high argon-40 levels found in the amber bubbles. For this leap to be valid, the author must assume that the argon-40 in those bubbles was actually trapped from the atmosphere when the resin originally formed, rather than being produced locally by radioactive decay and permeating the bubbles millions of years later. If we negate this correct answer (i.e., assume the argon-40 WAS significantly augmented by post-fossilization decay within the surrounding soil or the amber itself), the argument's core causal link collapses, proving this is a necessary assumption.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The elevated argon-40 levels in mid-Cretaceous amber bubbles must be the result of a massive global spike in tectonic outgassing during that epoch.
Isolating the conclusion is essential for determining what the argument fundamentally relies upon.
2
Analyze the premises provided as evidence.
The author cites the high concentration of argon-40 in the bubbles, notes that argon-40 is produced by crustal decay and released via outgassing, and points out that the mid-Cretaceous featured unprecedented continental rifting.
Understanding the evidence reveals the logical leap the author is making from the data to the conclusion.
3
Locate the logical vulnerability (the gap) in the reasoning.
The author assumes that the high argon-40 found in the amber accurately reflects the global atmosphere at the time of formation, ignoring the possibility of localized contamination over millions of years of burial.
Arguments relying on geological or fossil evidence often overlook post-depositional changes, which must be defended against.
4
Apply the Negation Test to evaluate the options.
Negating the correct option reveals that if local decay DID augment the argon-40 post-fossilization, the argument that it came from global tectonic outgassing collapses entirely.
The Negation Test is the most reliable method for proving an assumption is strictly necessary.

Anahtar Kavram

Defender Assumptions and Alternative Explanations
Tahmini Süre:2m 30s
Soru 590Soru →

The board of directors of Vantek Pharmaceuticals recently voted to rescind a substantial performance bonus previously awarded to its chief research officer. The bonus had been granted after the officer successfully accelerated the development of a lucrative cardiovascular drug. However, subsequent independent regulatory audits revealed that the accelerated timeline was achieved only because the research team bypassed several non-mandatory preliminary toxicity protocols, ultimately resulting in unexpected manufacturing delays and significant financial losses during commercial production. Because the research officer did not violate any mandatory regulatory guidelines or explicit contractual terms, several board members argued that the rescission was unfair. Nevertheless, the board's decision was entirely justified.

Which one of the following principles, if established, most helps to justify the board's decision to rescind the bonus?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: A governing board is justified in revoking a performance reward awarded for achieving an operational milestone if the discretionary methods used to attain that milestone directly result in substantial net operational losses.

Cevap

A governing board is justified in revoking a performance reward awarded for achieving an operational milestone if the discretionary methods used to attain that milestone directly result in substantial net operational losses.
The correct answer provides a sufficient condition for revoking an incentive reward that perfectly matches the facts of the case. The officer utilized discretionary methods (bypassing non-mandatory protocols) to achieve the milestone, which directly caused substantial operational losses. Applying this principle directly guarantees the conclusion that the board's decision to rescind the bonus was entirely justified.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the structure of the argument in the stimulus
Premises establish that the bonus was earned for acceleration, but that acceleration relied on skipping optional protocols, which subsequently caused major manufacturing delays and financial losses, despite not violating explicit rules. Conclusion states that rescinding the bonus was justified.
Principle-justify questions require identifying the exact normative gap between the descriptive facts and the evaluative conclusion.
2
Identify the missing logical link (the conditional bridge)
The argument requires a general rule stating that when an achievement is reached through discretionary shortcuts that produce severe downstream net harm, revoking the reward for that achievement is warranted.
Without a connecting principle, the premises describing the harm do not logically necessitate the normative claim that the rescission was justified.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to identify the sufficient bridging principle
The principle stating that revoking an incentive reward is justified when discretionary practices cause substantial net operational losses directly connects the facts to the conclusion.
The stimulus matches the antecedent of this conditional rule (discretionary bypassing of protocols leading to financial loss), thereby guaranteeing the truth of the consequent (revocation is justified).

Anahtar Kavram

Principle Justification and Conditional Logic

Alternatif Yöntem

Identify the core tension: the dissenter's argument rests on the absence of explicit rule violations, whereas the board's action rests on actual downstream economic harm. To justify the board, select the principle that validates harm-based accountability over formalistic compliance.
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 591Soru →

Consider the following argument:

Agronomist: The widespread adoption of genetically modified (GM) pest-resistant cotton in Region X has led to a significant decrease in the use of broad-spectrum chemical pesticides. Environmentalists claim that this reduction in pesticide use has allowed populations of beneficial predatory insects, which naturally control secondary pests like aphids, to rebound. However, the recent explosion of the aphid population in Region X's cotton fields demonstrates that the environmentalists' claim is incorrect.

The supplementary statement 'The genetically modified cotton cultivated in Region X produces a unique metabolic byproduct that makes aphids highly toxic to beneficial predatory insects' strengthens the agronomist's argument.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False
The correct answer is False because the supplementary statement actually weakens the agronomist's argument. The agronomist argues that the aphid explosion proves predatory insects did not rebound. However, if the aphids have become toxic to the predators due to the GM cotton, the aphid population would explode even if the predator populations had fully rebounded. By providing an alternative explanation for the aphid explosion that is consistent with the environmentalists' claim, the statement undermines the agronomist's logic rather than strengthening it.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and the main premise of the agronomist's argument.
Conclusion: The environmentalists' claim (that predatory insects have rebounded) is incorrect. Premise: There has been a recent explosion of the aphid population.
Deconstructing the argument into its core components is essential before evaluating how new evidence affects the reasoning.
2
Determine the unstated assumption bridging the premise and conclusion.
The agronomist assumes that an aphid explosion is mutually exclusive with a rebound of predatory insects; essentially, if the predators had rebounded, they would have prevented the aphid explosion.
Identifying the unstated assumption reveals the vulnerability in the argument's logic, which is the target for strengthening or weakening.
3
Analyze the supplementary statement to determine its impact on the causal relationship.
The statement reveals that aphids feeding on the GM cotton become toxic to the predatory insects.
Understanding the mechanism introduced by the new evidence is required to see how it interacts with the original argument.
4
Evaluate whether the new evidence strengthens or weakens the agronomist's conclusion.
If aphids are toxic to predators, the aphids would multiply uncontrollably even if predator populations had fully rebounded. This provides an alternative explanation for the aphid explosion that is entirely consistent with the environmentalists' claim, thus severely weakening the agronomist's argument.
Because the statement weakens the argument rather than strengthening it, the claim in the stem is false.

Anahtar Kavram

Differentiating between explaining a premise and strengthening an argument's causal reasoning.
Soru 592Soru →

Urban Planner: The current push to replace aging macro-grid infrastructure entirely with decentralized microgrids is misguided. Proponents of total decentralization correctly note that microgrids can autonomously isolate themselves during catastrophic weather events, thereby offering undeniable resilience against localized outages. What they ignore, however, is the inherent volatility of localized renewable energy generation. Macro-level grid integration is uniquely capable of smoothing out this volatility by instantaneously redistributing surplus power across vast geographic distances. Consequently, abandoning the integrated macro-grid would force a purely decentralized system to rely on massively redundant and highly impractical energy storage solutions just to maintain baseline stability.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the urban planner's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The resilience benefits of decentralized microgrids do not justify completely eliminating large-scale, integrated electrical grid infrastructure.

Cevap

The resilience benefits of decentralized microgrids do not justify completely eliminating large-scale, integrated electrical grid infrastructure.
The correct answer accurately synthesizes the author's primary claim, which is stated in the opening sentence: the push to entirely replace the macro-grid with microgrids is 'misguided'. It also correctly incorporates the author's concession regarding the 'resilience benefits' of microgrids, making it a perfect paraphrase of the overarching argument.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the first sentence of the stimulus.
Identified the author's primary claim: 'The current push to replace aging macro-grid infrastructure entirely with decentralized microgrids is misguided.'
Evaluative language like 'is misguided' often signals the author's main viewpoint.
2
Evaluate the structural role of the second sentence ('Proponents... correctly note...').
Recognized this as a concession to the opposing viewpoint, acknowledging the resilience of microgrids.
Concessions help define the scope of the main conclusion by showing what the author is willing to admit despite their ultimate disagreement.
3
Analyze the structural role of the final sentence ('Consequently, abandoning... would force...').
Determined that this is an intermediate conclusion describing the negative outcome of total decentralization.
Although introduced by the conclusion indicator 'Consequently', this sentence exists merely to prove *why* the push for total replacement is 'misguided' (the claim in sentence 1).
4
Synthesize the findings to formulate the main point.
The main point is that despite their resilience, it is a mistake to entirely replace the macro-grid with microgrids.
The correct answer must capture the overarching claim that all other premises and intermediate conclusions are designed to support.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying the ultimate conclusion in an argument where structural indicators (like 'consequently') deliberately misdirect attention toward intermediate conclusions.
Tahmini Süre:2m 15s
Soru 593Soru →

Lindo: To alleviate the severe housing shortage, the city must abolish single-family zoning regulations. While introducing high-density residential development will inevitably alter the historical character of the neighborhoods where it occurs, the resulting expansion in housing supply will drive down average rents. However, we must retain our strict municipal permitting fees on new construction. Without the revenue generated by these specific fees, the city cannot adequately fund the infrastructure upgrades required to support higher population densities.

Kael: Abolishing single-family zoning is indeed essential for increasing the housing supply, an expansion that will ultimately reduce average rent prices. But the claim that high-density development inevitably alters the historical character of the neighborhoods where it occurs is unfounded; strict design guidelines can entirely preserve a neighborhood's aesthetic heritage. Furthermore, retaining municipal permitting fees is a mistake. The infrastructure required for higher densities can be adequately funded through the expanded property tax base instead of permitting fees. Moreover, the popular notion that imposing rent control policies would alleviate the housing shortage is fundamentally flawed; such policies merely restrict new construction.

Analyze the dialogue between urban planner Lindo and economist Kael. Match each proposition below to the correct description of the speakers' stances on that proposition.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

The expansion of the housing supply resulting from the abolition of single-family zoning will cause average rent prices to decrease.
High-density residential development is bound to change the historical aesthetic of the specific neighborhoods in which it is built.
The increased property tax base resulting from new high-density development is sufficient on its own to finance necessary infrastructure upgrades.
Enacting rent control policies is a viable strategy for alleviating the city's housing shortage.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct matches map the rent decrease proposition to 'Both agree', the neighborhood aesthetic proposition to 'Lindo agrees; Kael disagrees', the property tax sufficiency proposition to 'Lindo disagrees; Kael agrees', and the rent control proposition to 'Lindo is uncommitted; Kael disagrees'.
Each proposition accurately reflects the logical commitments of the speakers based on both their explicit statements and the necessary logical inferences of their conditional claims.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze Lindo's and Kael's explicit statements regarding rent prices and zoning.
Both speakers affirm that abolishing single-family zoning will increase supply and decrease rent.
Establishing the explicit point of agreement separates shared premises from the actual points of dispute.
2
Evaluate the stances on the impact of high-density development on neighborhood character.
Lindo agrees it will inevitably alter the character, whereas Kael explicitly denies this necessity.
Identifying direct textual contradictions isolates primary points at issue.
3
Determine each speaker's logical commitment regarding the sufficiency of property taxes for infrastructure funding.
Lindo's claim that permitting fees are strictly necessary means she rejects the sufficiency of property taxes alone. Kael explicitly endorses property taxes as an adequate substitute.
Logical implications of conditional statements ('without X, not Y') reveal commitments that are not stated in direct affirmative terms.
4
Assess the dialogue for mentions of rent control.
Lindo is entirely silent on rent control, while Kael introduces and subsequently rejects it.
Recognizing when a speaker is uncommitted is crucial to avoid false attribution based on general ideological assumptions.

Anahtar Kavram

Point at Issue and Point of Agreement
Tahmini Süre:2m 30s
Soru 594Soru →

The Regional Agronomy Council revoked the organic certification of Northfield Farm after the farm planted a drought-resistant heirloom wheat strain obtained from an uncertified wild seed repository. Northfield Farm demonstrated that the wheat was cultivated entirely without synthetic pesticides or chemical fertilizers, and that the resulting harvest met all biochemical purity standards for organic grain. Nonetheless, the council maintained that adherence to certified seed provenance is mandatory. Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the Regional Agronomy Council's action?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: An agricultural product should not receive organic certification unless the provenance of its starting genetic material has been officially verified, even if the final harvest satisfies all substantive purity criteria.

Cevap

An agricultural product should not receive organic certification unless the provenance of its starting genetic material has been officially verified, even if the final harvest satisfies all substantive purity criteria.
The stimulus presents a scenario where a farm complied with substantive chemical purity and non-synthetic cultivation rules but failed a procedural requirement regarding seed provenance. The council revoked its organic certification. The correct principle provides the exact conditional rule required: verified provenance of starting material is a mandatory prerequisite for organic certification, and its absence warrants denial of certification even if final purity standards are fully satisfied.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's premises and conclusion in the stimulus
Premises: Northfield Farm used seeds from an uncertified repository, but cultivated the crop without synthetic chemicals and achieved full biochemical purity. Conclusion: The council was justified in revoking the farm's organic certification.
Principle-justify questions require isolating the logical gap between the factual premises and the normative outcome.
2
Determine the logical bridge required to justify the conclusion
A rule is needed stating that failing to verify seed provenance is sufficient grounds to deny or revoke organic certification, irrespective of whether the physical crop meets purity standards.
The council prioritized supply-chain procedural provenance over substantive chemical testing.
3
Evaluate candidate principles against the necessary logical bridge
The correct principle explicitly conditions organic certification on verified starting material provenance even when substantive purity standards are fulfilled.
This establishes a rule under which the stated facts strictly entail the council's punitive action without overextending beyond certification.

Anahtar Kavram

Bridging premise-conclusion gaps with conditional normative principles
Tahmini Süre:1m 15s
Soru 595Soru →

Neurobiologist: In a recent experiment, macaques performing tasks that required balancing potential risks against potential rewards exhibited elevated activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). When administered a targeted pharmacological agent that temporarily suppressed ACC activity, these macaques consistently chose low-risk, low-reward options, whereas a control group maintained a preference for high-risk, high-reward options. Thus, elevated ACC activity is a necessary neurobiological condition for macaques to favorably assess high-risk alternatives.

Which one of the following, if true, most strongly supports the neurobiologist's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: When presented with choices that carried identical, minimal risks, macaques administered the pharmacological agent demonstrated the same strong preference for high-reward options as the control group.

Cevap

When presented with choices that carried identical, minimal risks, macaques administered the pharmacological agent demonstrated the same strong preference for high-reward options as the control group.
The neurobiologist concludes that ACC activity is necessary specifically for the favorable assessment of high-risk alternatives. However, the experimental evidence only shows that suppressing the ACC stops macaques from choosing high-risk, high-reward options over low-risk, low-reward ones. A critical alternative explanation is that suppressing the ACC simply diminishes their desire for high rewards (making them not care enough to try). The correct answer eliminates this alternative explanation by demonstrating that when risk is held constant, the drug does not affect their strong preference for high rewards. By isolating the drug's effect to the risk variable, it strongly supports the causal connection drawn in the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
Elevated ACC activity is necessary for macaques to favorably assess high-risk alternatives.
To know what specific claim needs to be strengthened.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
Macaques making risk/reward choices have high ACC activity. Suppressing ACC activity causes them to abandon high-risk, high-reward options in favor of low-risk, low-reward ones.
To understand the causal evidence provided by the experiment.
3
Spot the potential gap or alternative explanation in the causal reasoning.
The pharmacological suppression might have caused the macaques to stop caring about the 'high-reward' aspect rather than specifically impairing their assessment of the 'high-risk' aspect.
Strengthen questions involving causal experiments often require eliminating prominent alternative explanations.
4
Evaluate the options to find one that eliminates this alternative explanation.
The correct option shows that when risk is equal and minimal, the drug-affected macaques still actively seek high rewards.
This isolates the drug's behavioral effect purely to the risk assessment, thereby directly strengthening the conclusion that ACC activity relates specifically to assessing risk.

Anahtar Kavram

Eliminating alternative explanations in causal reasoning
Soru 596Soru →

Below are four distinct causal claims along with their supporting evidence. Pair each claim with the abstract methodological finding that best resolves its primary logical gap.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

An observational survey revealed that individuals who frequently consume Vitamin Z supplements experience significantly lower rates of joint inflammation. Researchers conclude that Vitamin Z actively suppresses inflammatory responses.
Following a municipal ban on restaurant use of artificial trans fats, local cardiovascular emergencies dropped by 15 percent in a single year. Officials assert that the regulatory ban directly caused this rapid decline.
Asthma patients who began using a newly designed ionic air purifier in their bedrooms reported a drastic reduction in symptoms after two months. The manufacturer asserts the device's novel filtration technology is responsible for the relief.
Mice fed a diet exclusively consisting of a specific fermented grain lived 20 percent longer than mice fed a standard diet. Scientists hypothesize that the unique byproducts of the fermentation process are responsible for extending their lifespans.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The observational study (Vitamin Z) matches the finding about exacerbating baseline traits. The municipal ban matches the finding about comparable populations. The air purifier matches the finding about the inert device. The fermented grain matches the finding about the unmodified primary material.
Each correct match directly seals the unique logical vulnerability inherent in its corresponding causal argument. The observational study is strengthened by showing the correlation holds despite opposing confounders. The policy argument is strengthened by using neighboring regions as a control to rule out broader trends. The device argument is strengthened by ruling out the placebo effect via an inert replica. The biological experiment is strengthened by testing the base material to isolate the specific modification.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the observational study argument (Vitamin Z) to identify its causal gap.
The argument infers causation from correlation. A primary vulnerability is confounding variables (e.g., supplement users might generally have healthier lifestyles).
Identifying the specific flaw is required to find the statement that resolves it.
2
Identify the strengthening statement for the Vitamin Z argument.
The statement showing that the group possessed baseline traits that typically exacerbate the condition strengthens the argument.
This rules out positive confounding variables and highlights the efficacy of the vitamin, as it worked despite negative lifestyle factors.
3
Analyze the municipal ban argument to identify its causal gap.
The argument assumes a sequential relationship (ban, then drop in emergencies) is causal. It is vulnerable to concurrent historical trends (e.g., general medical advancements).
Understanding 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' vulnerabilities is key to policy analysis.
4
Identify the strengthening statement for the municipal ban argument.
The statement showing comparable populations without the intervention did not see the reduction addresses this gap.
It acts as a natural control group, ruling out broader concurrent trends as the cause.
5
Analyze the air purifier argument to identify its causal gap.
The argument relies on self-reported symptom reduction after using a new device, which is highly susceptible to the placebo effect.
Any visible intervention can cause perceived psychological and physiological relief.
6
Identify the strengthening statement for the air purifier argument.
The statement regarding an inert but physically identical device addresses this gap.
It effectively creates a blind control group, isolating the device's actual technology from the placebo effect.
7
Analyze the fermented grain argument to identify its causal gap.
The scientists attribute the benefit specifically to the fermentation process, ignoring the possibility that the base grain itself is the cause.
When a modified material has an effect, one must isolate the modification from the base material.
8
Identify the strengthening statement for the fermented grain argument.
The statement showing that the unmodified primary material did not produce the outcome effectively seals this gap.
It isolates the fermentation process as the true causal variable.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying and sealing specific causal vulnerabilities in logical arguments by mapping concrete scenarios to abstract methodological solutions.
Tahmini Süre:3m 0s
Soru 597Soru →

The Municipal Transit Oversight Board recently overturned a decision by the City Transportation Department to deploy an automated route-optimization algorithm designed by a private vendor. The department demonstrated that the algorithm would measurably reduce passenger wait times across all bus lines without increasing operational expenditures. Nevertheless, because the proprietary algorithms underlying the software prevent the department from explaining to affected neighborhoods precisely why specific transit stops were rescheduled or consolidated, the oversight board correctly concluded that the deployment should be suspended.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the oversight board's conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: A public administrative agency should not adopt an automated system altering public services if doing so prevents the agency from explaining the specific rationales for those alterations to the affected public.

Cevap

A public administrative agency should not adopt an automated system altering public services if doing so prevents the agency from explaining the specific rationales for those alterations to the affected public.
The correct principle establishes a conditional rule: If an automated service-delivery system prevents an agency from explaining specific service alterations to the public, then that system should not be adopted. When applied to the facts in the stimulus—where the proprietary algorithm prevented the transit department from explaining rescheduled stops to affected neighborhoods—the principle directly yields and justifies the oversight board's conclusion to suspend deployment.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the premises and the conclusion in the argument.
Premise: The algorithm improves efficiency (reduces wait times with no extra cost). Premise: The proprietary nature of the algorithm makes it impossible for the department to explain specific route changes to affected neighborhoods. Conclusion: The deployment of the algorithmic system should be suspended.
Principle-justify questions require identifying the logical gap between the factual premises and the normative conclusion.
2
Identify the normative assumption needed to justify the conclusion.
The argument assumes that administrative transparency and explainability to affected service users take precedence over operational efficiency, such that an inability to explain changes justifies not deploying the system.
Connecting the lack of explainability directly to the impermissibility of deployment is necessary to validate the board's ruling.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find the principle that provides a sufficient bridge.
The principle stating that an agency should not adopt an automated system if it cannot explain the rationales for service alterations to the affected public perfectly bridges the factual premise to the conclusion.
A valid justifying principle must create a rule whose antecedent matches the stimulus condition and whose consequent guarantees the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying a sufficient governing principle that bridges factual premises about administrative explainability to a normative judgment of procedural suspension.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 598Soru →

The Regional Water Reclamation Board recently revoked an agricultural cooperative's commercial irrigation permit after the cooperative deepened its primary extraction wells. Although the cooperative never exceeded the volumetric water quotas specified in its permit and no explicit statutory provision barred modifying extraction depth, the deeper pumping accelerated saltwater intrusion into the municipal aquifer system. Because protecting potable water reserves is essential to civic welfare, the Board's decision to revoke the permit was entirely justified.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the Board's revocation of the permit?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: An administrative body is justified in revoking an authorization when the recipient exercises permitted activities in a way that impairs vital public resources, even if that specific operational conduct is not expressly prohibited.

Cevap

The statement asserting that an administrative body is justified in revoking an authorization when the recipient exercises permitted activities in a way that impairs vital public resources, even if that specific conduct is not expressly prohibited.
The correct principle supplies a general normative rule that directly connects the factual premises (the cooperative exercised permitted rights without violating explicit depth rules, but damaged a critical municipal aquifer) to the conclusion (the Board was justified in revoking the permit). By stating that harm to vital public resources justifies revocation even without an express prohibition, it provides a sufficient logical bridge.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument's premises and conclusion to identify the logical gap.
Premises: The cooperative obeyed all volumetric limits and broke no explicit rules regarding well depth, but deepening the wells caused saltwater intrusion into municipal aquifers. Conclusion: The Board was justified in revoking the permit.
Principle-justify questions require bridging the gap between factual premises and a normative conclusion.
2
Determine the necessary conditional bridge required to justify the conclusion.
A rule stating that when permitted actions threaten a critical public resource, an agency is justified in revoking the permit even in the absence of an explicit violation.
The argument assumes that harm to public drinking water reserves overrides the technical compliance with express permit terms.
3
Evaluate the choices to find the principle providing sufficient justification without introducing illicit reversals or overextensions.
The principle validating revocation when permitted actions impair vital public resources despite lack of express prohibition directly entails the conclusion.
It supplies the exact sufficient condition needed to make the argument logically sound.

Anahtar Kavram

Principle-Justify / Bridge Assumption
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 599Soru →

Epistemologist: Many scientists assert that the ultimate aim of physics is to achieve a completely objective description of the universe, independent of human perception. However, any theoretical model must necessarily be formulated using mathematical structures, which are themselves cognitive constructs inherent to human reasoning. Therefore, a perfectly objective description of reality is a fundamental impossibility. Given that the institutional pursuit of impossible ideals systematically diverts funding from pragmatically solvable problems, the scientific community ought to officially reorient its primary objectives toward maximizing predictive utility rather than seeking absolute ontological truth.

Which of the following most accurately describes the role played in the epistemologist's argument by the claim that a perfectly objective description of reality is a fundamental impossibility?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: It is an intermediate conclusion drawn from a premise about the cognitive basis of theoretical models, and it is used to support the argument's main prescriptive claim.

Cevap

The statement acts as an intermediate (subsidiary) conclusion that bridges the gap between the initial premise about cognitive constructs and the final recommendation about reorienting scientific objectives.
The correct answer accurately maps the two-fold structural role of the targeted claim. First, it is a conclusion supported by the preceding sentence (which states that theoretical models rely on cognitive constructs). Second, it acts as a premise for the final sentence, establishing that absolute ontological truth is an 'impossible ideal', which in turn supports the final recommendation to reorient scientific objectives. A claim that is both supported by premises and used to support the main conclusion is definitively an intermediate conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the stimulus to determine the epistemologist's ultimate point.
The main conclusion is the final clause: the scientific community ought to officially reorient its primary objectives toward maximizing predictive utility.
The phrase 'ought to' signals a final recommendation, and this claim is logically supported by all the preceding reasoning about impossible ideals.
2
Determine the structural function of the targeted claim.
The claim is introduced by 'Therefore' and directly follows the assertion about theoretical models being cognitive constructs.
Structural indicator words like 'Therefore' explicitly mark conclusions that are drawn from preceding premises.
3
Trace the logical connection between the targeted claim and the main conclusion.
The targeted claim establishes that an objective description is an 'impossible ideal.' The subsequent sentence uses this established fact as a premise to justify the main conclusion.
Because the claim is supported by previous statements and, in turn, supports the final conclusion, its structural role is that of an intermediate (or subsidiary) conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying intermediate conclusions and mapping multi-step argument structures.
Soru 600Soru →

A university research consortium recently terminated its collaborative genomics agreement with a private pharmaceutical firm after the firm filed for exclusive patents on diagnostic biomarkers discovered through the shared repository. Although the founding charter permitted commercial partners to patent downstream therapeutic interventions developed independently, consortium ethicists argued that the university was morally obligated to rescind the partnership because patenting the basic diagnostic sequences themselves directly impedes subsequent noncommercial public health research by other institutions.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the ethicists' reasoning?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: An academic institution is morally obligated to terminate a collaborative research agreement if a commercial partner asserts exclusive intellectual property claims over shared discoveries in a manner that impedes noncommercial public health research.

Cevap

An academic institution is morally obligated to terminate a collaborative research agreement if a commercial partner asserts exclusive intellectual property claims over shared discoveries in a manner that impedes noncommercial public health research.
The ethicists conclude that the university had a moral duty to rescind its collaborative agreement because the pharmaceutical firm's patenting of shared biomarkers obstructed noncommercial public health research. The correct principle provides the exact sufficient rule required: whenever a private partner asserts exclusive rights over shared discoveries in a way that hinders noncommercial public health research, an academic institution is morally obligated to terminate the collaboration.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Isolate the premises and the normative conclusion in the stimulus.
Premise: The private firm patented basic diagnostic biomarkers discovered via a shared repository, which directly impedes noncommercial public health research by other institutions. Conclusion: The university was morally obligated to rescind the partnership.
Justifying an argument requires identifying the logical leap between empirical facts and an ethical judgment.
2
Determine the structural requirement of a principle that justifies the conclusion.
The principle must establish a sufficient condition: [Commercial partner claims IP over shared discoveries that obstructs noncommercial research] → [Academic institution is morally obligated to terminate the agreement].
A sufficient condition guarantees that the occurrence of the premise triggers the stated moral obligation.
3
Match the required conditional bridge to the options.
The option asserting an obligation to terminate when a partner asserts IP claims over shared discoveries that impede noncommercial public health research precisely bridges the gap.
It matches both the specific antecedent circumstances and the normative consequence without overreaching or reversing the logic.

Anahtar Kavram

Sufficient normative principles bridging factual premises to ethical conclusions
Tahmini Süre:1m 45s
ÖncekiSayfa 30 / 34Sonraki
Logical Reasoning Alıştırma Soruları — LSAT — Sayfa 30 | Examkin