The Little Blue Reasoning Book - Brandon Royal [66]
What do you need in order to prove that metallic suits really work? The framework for setting this problem up is the basis for experimental design problems, as seen in real-life research.
This problem highlights the trap of proof by selected instances. People trying to prove the efficacy of wearing metallic suits cite examples from categories (a) and (d). That is, they cite instances of surfers wearing black suits and getting attacked by sharks (see “a”) and also cite instances of surfers in metallic wet suits who do not get attacked by sharks (see “d”). People trying to prove the efficacy of wearing traditional black suits cite examples from categories (b) and (c). That is, they cite instances of surfers wearing metallic suits and getting attacked by sharks (see “c”) while citing instances of surfers wearing black suits and not getting attacked by sharks (see “b”).
It is quite possible that in recent months there haven’t been any shark attacks. In such an event, any comparison about the efficacy of wearing metallic suits would prove fruitless, as depicted in the chart below containing hypothetical numbers.
If we had actual numbers for all boxes, we could make a percentage comparison to determine whether wearing a metallic suit really made a difference. The number of surfers wearing black suits who were attacked by sharks would be divided by the total number of surfers wearing black suits. The number of surfers wearing metallic suits who were attacked by sharks would be divided by the total number of surfers wearing metallic suits. A comparison of these two percentage figures would yield a conclusion.
Author’s note: Below is an original statement enclosed in quotation marks. Which of the two statements that follow add most support for the original statement?
Original: “Firm ABC is spending money on advertising and seeing an increase in sales. Clearly advertising is causing the increase in sales.”
Statement I: Other competing firms are also spending money on advertising and seeing an increase in their sales.
Statement II: Without spending money on advertising, Firm ABC would not have seen an increase in sales.
The answer is statement II. Although statement I lends some support to the proposition that advertising expenditure is leading to an increase in the sales of Firm ABC, what we really want to know is the opposite — what happens when we do not spend money on advertising. If we do not spend money on advertising, we would expect to see a resulting decrease in current sales levels. If not, then this would call into question whether advertising is really causing our sales to increase and suggest that another cause is responsible for the increase in sales.
Back to problem
Implementation Assumptions
Problem 25: Solar Energy
Choice C. If research has not yet developed an effective way to capture and store solar energy in a way that most families can employ, then this would seriously weaken the argument. This “plan” will not work if we lack the prerequisite technological capability to implement the solution.
Choice A is irrelevant. Choice B slightly weakens the argument by suggesting that powerful utility monopolies are acting in their own self-interest by not presenting fair and impartial information. Choices D and E bring the issue of cost into play but the argument made suggests other considerations besides costs that favor the adoption of solar energy. For example, solar energy is superior because it eliminates air and water pollution, and in the case of nuclear energy, the threat of radiation.
Back to problem
Problem 26: Classics
Choice E. In order for a plan to work, desire or motivation on the part of the individual or organization must be present. Here, the operative word is “can” and the ability to do something does not necessarily translate to the “will” to do something.