#15 - People would not follow a leader if they felt that there was nothing they

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Parallel Flaw. The correct answer choice is (A).

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[zoezoe6021]

I don't see the flaw here.

Stimulus:
Premise: /gain→/follow
Conclusion：follow→gain

[Jeff Wren]

Hi Zoe,

This question (like so many) is really a test of very careful reading and being very precise with the terms in an argument and noticing when those terms change.

The stimulus starts by stating that "people would not follow a leader if they felt that there was nothing they could gain by following that leader" (my emphasis). The key word here is "felt." Just because people feel that there is or isn't something to gain doesn't actually mean that they are correct.

This statement is conditional.

If people didn't feel that there was something to gain, then they would not follow a leader.

The contrapositive would be:

If they did follow a leader, then they felt that there was something to gain.

The conclusion of the argument isn't that the people felt like there was something to gain, but that they did in fact gain/benefit ("the leaders brought some good to their followers"), which is not necessarily true, of course.

Answer A parallels this flaw by going from what people believe is true about certain theories to then concluding that there is some actual truth to these theories.

[lemonade42]

Hi, I'm having trouble seeing how the conclusion is follow ----> gain.
I saw it as gain ---> follow
So I was looking for an MN mistake since the statement in the stimulus was "nothing to gain ---> not follow"

[Jeff Wren]

Hi lemonade,

So the conclusion isn't actually worded as a conditional statement, so it's understandable how it can be confusing to understand/diagram.

By stating that "even leaders who are evil or incompetent bring some good," the implication is that all leaders (even the evil and incompetent ones) bring some good.

Your diagram, (if there's a gain, then they will follow) doesn't match the meaning of the conclusion because it would be possible to follow leaders even without getting a gain/some good.

The flaw in the conclusion isn't a Mistaken Negation. Instead, it's the subtle shift in wording/terms from feeling that there is something to gain in the premise to actually gaining something in the conclusion.