QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Gardeners without a use for homegrown honey will tend to have gardens that don’t have excellent pollination.
REASONING: You need bees for excellent pollination. If you install a beehive, you will definitely have bees. But you probably won’t have a beehive unless you have a use for homegrown honey.
ANALYSIS: This is like saying that if you install an $8,000 water filtration system, you’ll definitely have drinking water. So if you don’t install such a system, you’ll die of thirst.
A beehive is sufficient for excellent pollination. It’s not necessary. I had plenty of bees and pollination in my backyard even though my parents didn’t establish a beehive.
- There may be other advantages to beehives, but it simply isn’t economical unless the gardener needs honey.
- The sufficient-necessary mixup is about whether bees will be present, not whether pollination will occur. Bees are a necessary condition for pollination, that’s very clear.
- The argument doesn’t say that a lack of pollination will lead to a lack of fruits and vegetables. The conclusion is not about fruits and vegetables.
- CORRECT. Beehives are a sufficient condition for bees. But they aren’t necessary. There are lots of bees in areas without beekeepers.
- The argument didn’t say that beehives always lead to excellent pollination. The author just said that bees are a necessary condition for excellent pollination, and that beehives make sure that a garden will have bees.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions