CR
Very few software engineers have left MicroFirm Corporation to seek employment elsewhere. Thus, unless CompTech Corporation increases the salaries of its software engineers to the same level as those of MicroFirm's, these CompTech employees are likely to leave CompTech for another employer.
The flawed reasoning in the argument above is most similar to the reasoning in which of the following arguments?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/05e80/05e80fd0969cd1e4d0186c25cd88b58c0421202a" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/05e80/05e80fd0969cd1e4d0186c25cd88b58c0421202a" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/63c79/63c79b682041afd89b9fef4eba66e5c702142827" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/05e80/05e80fd0969cd1e4d0186c25cd88b58c0421202a" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/05e80/05e80fd0969cd1e4d0186c25cd88b58c0421202a" alt=""
The correct answer is (D). The original argument's line of reasoning is essentially as follows:
Premise: The well-paid engineers at CompTech do not quit their jobs.
Conclusion: If MicroFirm engineers are not well-paid, they will quit their jobs.
You can express this argument symbolically as follows:
Premise: All A's are B's.
Conclusion: If not A, then not B.
The reasoning is fallacious (flawed), because it fails to account for other possible reasons why MicroFirm engineers have not left their jobs. (Some B's might not be A's.) (D) is the only answer choice that demonstrates the same essential pattern of flawed reasoning. To recognize the similarity, rephrase the argument's sentence structure to match the essence of the original argument:
Premise: All people who practice diligently (A) achieve perfection (B).
Conclusion: If one does not practice diligently (not A) one cannot achieve perfection (not B).
No comments:
Post a Comment