- Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:44 pm
#25946
Maxim
The key to the argument (and the key flaw in the argument, for that matter) is in the conclusion. The author first states that computers and the human minds share similar characteristics (the capacity to represent and to perform logical transformations on pieces of information). The author then concludes that this makes one thing a type of the other. That isn't necessarily true.
Using the Conclusion Test, any correct answer would have to make the same flawed claim that because two thing share similar characteristics, one thing is a type of the other. Answer choice (C) does this. It argues that organisms and communities both have a similar characteristic (they have an interdependence of components) and that therefore communities are a type of organism ("communities belong to the category of organisms").
Answer choice (B) on the other hand, concludes that because two things share a similar characteristic, that characteristic cannot be a reasonable criterion for distinguishing one thing from other similar things. That is a fundamentally different conclusion from claiming one thing is a type of the other.
Also, it would be incorrect to characterize this conclusion as "Human mind = computer." If the human mind equals a computer, then a computer equals a human mind. But that is not what the author is saying. The author is basically saying that the human mind is a subcategory or type of computer.
Finally, this question is really not a good candidate for diagramming. The important part to identify in answer choice (C) is that, regardless of what the characteristic is, organisms and communities share that characteristic. That is the part that needs to be duplicated.
Eric Ockert
PowerScore LSAT/GMAT/SAT Instructor