The Little Blue Reasoning Book - Brandon Royal [67]
Perhaps the easiest way to summarize the problem is to say that just because most literate people have not read the classics does not mean that they are necessarily lazy. Most literate people may simply choose not to spend their time doing so. Also, even if a person is lazy, he or she may still be able to read the classics. For example, the literate but lazy person may just read very slowly or in fits and starts but still arrive at the finish line. All we do know is that some people have likely read the classics. For all we know, some of these people might be motivated and some might be lazy. We cannot assume that all of the people who have read the classics belong to the motivated group.
Choice D is not correct because the original statement is not a true “if … then” statement, meaning that the contrapositive is not a valid inference, as it would otherwise be (see Exhibit 5.3). The original statement only states that a person who is literate and not lazy “can” read the classics.
Here is an example which illustrates how choice D might have been a correct choice. Say the original statement was a true “if … then” statement as follows:
Hypothetical: “If a person is literate and is not lazy then he or she will read the classics.”
Here, the contrapositive leads to a correct inference.
Statement: “If a person has not read the classics then he or she is a literate person who is lazy!”
Author’s note: Here is a follow-up problem highlighting a common assumption as found in an everyday setting. A plan may not be feasible due to lack of financial wherewithal.
Economic recessions are opportunities for industrial change. Industries are forced to close their doors and throw workers out of jobs. In due course, some of the workers thus displaced from work become the entrepreneurs who drive new industries; others learn new skills so that when the economy revives they can join in a new pattern of industry.
The speaker in the passage above assumes which of the following?
A) The innovative ideas of entrepreneurs seem so radical that they are ignored until such time as no other solutions present themselves.
B) Economic recessions require a society to reevaluate its economic priorities and its methods of production.
C) Some of the workers displaced by an economic recession have, or are able to find, the financial resources to support themselves while learning new skills.
D) The overall effect of an economic recession is to eliminate inefficient industrial methods and thereby make room for new industrial methods.
E) An economic recession affects all members of a society regardless of their economic positions.
The correct answer is choice C. The original argument sounds persuasive enough: economic recessions provide new opportunities for persons out of work to learn new skills and again become productive. However, the passage assumes that a person has the wherewithal (financial resources) not only to support him- or herself while out of a job but also to pay to acquire new skills. Choices A and E are essentially irrelevant. Choices B and D are trickier. However, these two choices essentially restate the claim made in the original argument and do little to damage the assumption.
Try approaching this problem using classic argument structure. The conclusion is the very first sentence — “Economic recessions are opportunities for industrial change.” The rest of the sentences are evidence, i.e., “Industries that are forced to close throw workers out of jobs. In due course, some of the workers thus displaced from work become the entrepreneurs who find new industries; others learn new skills so that when the economy revives they can join in a new pattern of industry.” After you re-read the conclusion, stop and ask yourself: why are economic recessions opportunities for industrial change? The reason is contained in the evidence (or premises). Basically, they are opportunities because people can retrain themselves. Once you have answered this question, it becomes much more obvious