• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

Back to problem

Problem 27: Public Transportation

Choice A. The fact that there may be better or easier ways to lower pollution levels in most major cities falls outside the scope of this argument. The argument only concerns itself with the idea that people should leave their cars at home and take public transportation to combat pollution. Also outside the scope of this argument would be the idea that most major cities have other more pressing problems, such as poverty, crime, or affordable housing.

This question was chosen to highlight implementation assumptions that can occur in critical reasoning problems. Choices B, C, D, and E are all valid implementation assumptions. Choice B questions whether enough people actually own cars or use them to drive to work. In the most basic sense, if people do not own cars the argument is irrelevant. Choice C highlights a lack of required opportunity to make a plan work. Public transportation must be both available and accessible should someone decide to switch. Choices D and E highlight unanticipated bottlenecks, namely, whether the current public transportation system can accommodate all the people who decide to switch, as well as meet financial requirements.

Back to problem

Problem 28: Rainbow Corp

Choice B. If Tina is not aware of the recent newspaper articles featuring Rainbow Corp. as an environmental culprit, it does not make sense to conclude that she does not care about the environment. Choices A and C are irrelevant. In choice D, even if the company’s public relations department didn’t issue a statement denying that it violated the law, this does not mean that the company is guilty of any wrongdoing. Rainbow Corp.’s actual guilt or innocence has no impact on the issue at hand because Tina has no idea of the indictment. In choice D, the fact that Tina was a member of an environmental protection organization during her freshman and sophomore years in college weakens the claim a little, but not substantially.

Author’s note: Let’s review another example. Suppose that a certain global think tank is reviewing national anthems and the significance of their historical themes. It concludes that most national anthems have militaristic themes due in part to their creation during times of war or other conflict. Therefore, the think tank recommends that in the context of preserving global peace and stability, countries should consider changing their national anthems to rid them of any militaristic references. What would weaken this claim? Any suggestion that citizens today are unaware of the presence of any militaristic themes in their countries’ national anthems.

Back to problem

Problem 29: Personality

Choice C. A fundamental assumption is that business school interviewers can accurately identify the traits which lead to success in business school. If, for example, affability (friendliness) is a desired trait, then how will an interviewer judge whether a candidate possesses this quality? If intelligence is a desired trait, does this translate to looking for polished speaking ability, a perceived analytical mindset, or the ability to tell interesting stories? In general, how will an interviewer ascertain whether the candidate has a winning personality?

Choice A is a distortion. The interview may be an integral part of the interview process but not result, in and by itself, in a successful admissions effort. Good interviewing may be correlated with a successful admissions effort but not be the cause of a good admissions effort (i.e., correlation vs. causation). Also review Necessary vs. Sufficient Conditions, covered in chapter 5. Good interviewing is likely a necessary but not a sufficient condition for a generally good admissions process.

Choice D is also a distortion. The interview need not have only one purpose. In addition to assessing candidates’ personalities, interviewers might wish to seek clarification with respect to the applicants’ backgrounds. Business