#14 - Advertisement: HomeGlo Paints, Inc., has won the

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below! Thanks!

[ValVal]

Hi there!

When I analyzed all of the answer choices, I get it why D is the correct answer. However, when I tried to rule out answer choices using "Mechanistic Approach" described in the LR Bible I apparently failed and ruled out the right answer choice.
So my question is, would the Mechanistic Approach work in every type of situation or it has its limits? And is it applicable in this particular question?

Thanks!

[Adam Tyson]

Hello,ValVal! Thanks for your question. The Mechanistic Approach is used for Justify the Conclusion questions, where you are trying to prove that the conclusion is valid by adding some new information. That approach has you focus on simply connecting the rogue or new elements in the conclusion back to something in the premises that was not mentioned in the conclusion.

As this question is a Parallel Flaw in the Reasoning question, it's not only not a good candidate for using that approach, it's not even in the same family as a Justify (the "help family"). Try to avoid mixing up those various techniques and applying them to questions that they are not designed for. Another common example is the Agree/Disagree test for Point at Issue questions. You wouldn't want to use that for, say, a Method of Reasoning question, because that is not what it is designed for.

In any Flaw question, you should start with an understanding of what the flaw is (whether you can put a handy label on it, like "source argument", or not). Here, that's something like "the author presumes that just because something is the most improved that it must now be the best". If I was forced to label it, I would say it's a type of Relativity Flaw - just because something is better than it was doesn't mean that it's good. Answer D has the same type of flaw, where we look at someone who has shown the most improvement and conclude that they are now the best.

Glad to see that you are using the LR Bible, which is a pretty darn good book! Just be sure to keep the techniques sorted out and applied only where they work best. Keep at it, you'll get there!

[ValVal]

Thanks a lot Adam! That helped!

[Pragmatism]

It is obvious now why answer choice D was the correct answer. However, I thought the issue with the stimulus was two-fold: 1. Temporal, being that they improved over three years, doesn't mean they are the best now. 2. Relativity, which is the reasoning why D was correct.

My question is, how can one be safe to assume that there is no temporal flaw with an argument, when that timeframe is given to support part of the premise, e.g. "increased the environmental safety of its product most over the past three years?"

Thanks

[clairehoran]

Hi Pragmatism,

Just because there is a temporal element in a question doesn't mean there is a flaw. Although labels can be helpful, they are just shortcuts, and you should be able to explain more fully why an argument is flawed before selecting an answer. Your paraphrase of a "temporal flaw"—being that they improved over three years, doesn't mean they are the best now—doesn't involve a temporal problem at all. This is just the flaw that Adam pointed out: "just because something is the most improved" doesn't mean "that it must now be the best." It sounds like you are getting a little too caught up in labels and taking shortcuts. Make sure you are fully thinking through what the flaw actually is in the argument and why it is flawed. There are types of flaws that you may not have a name for, but if you think through them, you will recognize them as flawed nonetheless.

Good luck!

[Adam Tyson]

To further clarify Claire's response, a true temporal flaw (what we usually call a "time shift", which always makes me think of an episode of Star Trek) is one where the author claims that because something happened in the past, it will happen again in the present or in the future. It's sort of like the stock market and the classic advice you get from financial advisers - "past performance does not guarantee future results".

[Pragmatism]

I got it. Thank you Claire and Adam.

[ngreen221]

Hello,

I had B and D as contenders, but chose incorrectly chose B. May I have an explanation of why B is incorrect?

Thank you

[Adam Tyson]

Sure thing, ngreen221! The flaw in answer B is not about relativity, going from "most improved" (or "biggest increase" to keep it more abstract) to a conclusion of "best" or "biggest". Instead, the premise establishes that it is the most nutritious cereal, and then concludes that it must be the most nutritious food. Maybe that's a sort of part-to-whole flaw? I don't want to get hung up on the labels, so let's not worry about that part of it. This answer just has nothing about going from an increase relative to other things, to a conclusion about an absolute relationship with those other things. There's no aspect of increase at all! That kills this answer, and should make D much more attractive.