QUESTION TEXT: The report released by the interior ministry…
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning
CONCLUSION: The report isn’t right.
REASONING: The prestigious and brilliant Senator Armand says the report can’t be right.
ANALYSIS: The report is on land reclamation, and Senator Armand is only an expert in math. Smart though she is, we can’t simply take her claims at face value. We need some actual evidence.
If she were a relevant expert we might believe her without demanding additional proof. Maybe.
___________
- This is a bad argument, because Albert’s father could have hidden the keys in a new location. But it doesn’t argue from authority.
- This is a good argument, if Gloria is telling the truth.
- This is a good argument. Dr. Treviso is a relevant expert, and we can believe him when he says the facts contradict Amos’ claim.
- This is a bad argument. Evelyn might simply have decided not to watch the late news, even though she was home on time. But the main flaw isn’t Robert’s lack of relevant authority.
- CORRECT. This is a bad argument. Lomas is a bicycle engineering expert. That sounds relevant, but it’s only partly so. Lomas isn’t exactly an expert on bicycle racers themselves. And there are many reasons why Adams could have lost the race. Maybe he fell.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Leave a Reply