- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:16 pm
#22640
Question #12: Flaw—SN. The correct answer choice is (D).
The author of this stimulus presents a number of conditional statements, and draws a flawed conditional conclusion.
The stimulus begins with the Duke’s argument that only virtuous Acredian rulers concerned with the well-being of the people will be able to rule successfully. Since “only” is a necessary condition indicator, this statement can be diagrammed as follows:
Rule successfully
Concern for welfare
The author concludes that this argument is valid, because whenever Acredian governments have fallen (i.e. whenever the rulers were not successful), their falls have always coincided with a ruler who disregards the people’s needs (i.e. a ruler who was not concerned with the well-being of the people). Note the importance of seeing the logical equivalence between a “fallen government” and an “unsuccessful ruler,” and also between “disregarding people’s needs” and the “lack of concern with the well-being of the people.” These are clearly synonymous expressions, but the difference in language makes the underlying logical fallacy harder to spot:
Answer choice (A): The author argues that concern for the welfare of the people is necessary for successful governance, but never discusses what this concern actually entails. This answer choice outlines a possibility that falls outside the scope of the argument.
Answer choice (B): This is an attractive answer choice, as it comes very close to describing the Mistaken Negation we are looking for. However, note that the author infers the necessity of a certain condition for success from the fact that its absence has always associated with, not led to, failure. The difference is minor but crucial, as no overt causal relationship between the two is ever asserted: disregarding people’s needs may correlate with failure, but it does not necessarily lead to failure. This answer choice fails the Prove Test and is therefore incorrect.
If you failed to notice this slight shift in language upon initial inspection, it would have been wise to leave this answer choice as a Contender and move on. You would have quickly realized that answer choice (D) makes a similar claim, forcing you to examine how the two choices differ in their description of the logical flaw.
Answer choice (C): The author makes no appeal to evidence from biased sources. Even if the Duke’s argument has the potential for bias, the author does not appeal to it in reaching her conclusion. She only claims that he was right, an observation she reaches by appealing to the historical evidence that (presumably) bears it out. Of course, had you noticed the Mistaken Negation early on, eliminating this answer choice would have been a no-brainer.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice, as it describes the Mistaken Negation reflected in the stimulus. The author infers that a certain condition (concern for the welfare of the people) is required for successful governance from the fact that the lack of that condition (rulers disregarding people’s needs) is associated with failure. The two occurrences are correlated, which is precisely why their relationship is properly described as an association, not a causation, as answer choice (B) erroneously contends.
Answer choice (E): Hopefully you were able to eliminate this answer choice relatively quickly, as author makes no assumptions about whether the character of past rulers can be objectively assessed.
The author of this stimulus presents a number of conditional statements, and draws a flawed conditional conclusion.
The stimulus begins with the Duke’s argument that only virtuous Acredian rulers concerned with the well-being of the people will be able to rule successfully. Since “only” is a necessary condition indicator, this statement can be diagrammed as follows:
Rule successfully
Concern for welfare The author concludes that this argument is valid, because whenever Acredian governments have fallen (i.e. whenever the rulers were not successful), their falls have always coincided with a ruler who disregards the people’s needs (i.e. a ruler who was not concerned with the well-being of the people). Note the importance of seeing the logical equivalence between a “fallen government” and an “unsuccessful ruler,” and also between “disregarding people’s needs” and the “lack of concern with the well-being of the people.” These are clearly synonymous expressions, but the difference in language makes the underlying logical fallacy harder to spot:
Premise: NOT Rule successfullyThis is a classic error in conditional reasoning, known as a Mistaken Negation. The question stem asks us to describe it in abstract terms, which would be difficult to do without using the requisite terms of conditional reasoning (e.g. “sufficient,” “necessary,” or a synonym). Note, however, that the use of such terms alone does not automatically make a given answer choice correct, nor does their absence guarantee that the answer choice is incorrect.
Conclusion: Rule successfully
Answer choice (A): The author argues that concern for the welfare of the people is necessary for successful governance, but never discusses what this concern actually entails. This answer choice outlines a possibility that falls outside the scope of the argument.
Answer choice (B): This is an attractive answer choice, as it comes very close to describing the Mistaken Negation we are looking for. However, note that the author infers the necessity of a certain condition for success from the fact that its absence has always associated with, not led to, failure. The difference is minor but crucial, as no overt causal relationship between the two is ever asserted: disregarding people’s needs may correlate with failure, but it does not necessarily lead to failure. This answer choice fails the Prove Test and is therefore incorrect.
If you failed to notice this slight shift in language upon initial inspection, it would have been wise to leave this answer choice as a Contender and move on. You would have quickly realized that answer choice (D) makes a similar claim, forcing you to examine how the two choices differ in their description of the logical flaw.
Answer choice (C): The author makes no appeal to evidence from biased sources. Even if the Duke’s argument has the potential for bias, the author does not appeal to it in reaching her conclusion. She only claims that he was right, an observation she reaches by appealing to the historical evidence that (presumably) bears it out. Of course, had you noticed the Mistaken Negation early on, eliminating this answer choice would have been a no-brainer.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice, as it describes the Mistaken Negation reflected in the stimulus. The author infers that a certain condition (concern for the welfare of the people) is required for successful governance from the fact that the lack of that condition (rulers disregarding people’s needs) is associated with failure. The two occurrences are correlated, which is precisely why their relationship is properly described as an association, not a causation, as answer choice (B) erroneously contends.
Answer choice (E): Hopefully you were able to eliminate this answer choice relatively quickly, as author makes no assumptions about whether the character of past rulers can be objectively assessed.
this is what the conclusion claims, that concern for welfare is necessary for government success 