QUESTION TEXT: Legislator: The recently passed highway bill is…
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Voters hate the highway bill.
REASONING: The ruling party is predicted to lose seats in the next election.
ANALYSIS: Governments do hundreds of things. You can’t just pick one and say “and this is why the government is unpopular”. Most government bills are unknown and uncontroversial.
___________
- CORRECT. Precisely. The author has utterly failed to link the government’s unpopularity to the highway bill. Governments do many things and there is no reason to think it is the bill in particular that is unpopular.
This answer sounds extremely harsh, but it’s an accurate description of the strength of the argument. - Actually, the author didn’t introduce any evidence that the bill was unpopular. They should have focussed more on that. (They concluded it is unpopular, which isn’t the same as evidence)
In any case, this isn’t a flaw. The argument is only about popularity. It’s a totally legitimate analysis to focus on how well something polls. - This describes a circular argument, one with literally no evidence. That didn’t happen here. The author’s evidence for the conclusion was that the ruling party will lose seats. It isn’t relevant evidence, but it brings the argument beyond circularity. Circular arguments don’t even have irrelevant evidence.
Example of argument: The recently passed highway bill must be unpopular, because any bill like the highway bill would be unpopular. - This would be a different argument. And even dumber.
Example of argument: Boy, I wish that people hated the highway bill as much as I do. Hmm, I just watched Aladdin. Maybe that means my wish came true? Wow, so people really must hate the highway bill too! - The argument is only about popularity. No expertise is required. You don’t have to be an expert to like or dislike something.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Leave a Reply