• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

Choice A is an example of the fallacy of affirming the consequent, and tip #41 highlights this erroneous deduction. It is likely that other factors besides intricate plots also go into the making of a significant art form. Choice B is the fallacy of denying the antecedent. Choice D is outside the scope of the argument; we do not know whether scriptwriting is the most likely art form to become a significant one. Choice E is out; there is no reason to believe that more is better; perhaps one intricate plot per script is enough.

Back to problem

Problem 33: Campus Pub

Choice D. This example highlights the fallacy of denying the antecedent. Looking back at the original, we find that just because it is not final exam week does not necessarily mean that the campus pub is not selling a lot of beer. For all we know the campus pub sells a lot of beer every week because it is a popular pub. It is certainly likely that the campus pub does sell a lot of beer during final exam week, when students seek to relieve stress or celebrate. There could also be other lucrative weeks, particularly when sports matches such as football and basketball are being played.

In choice D, just because no one is happy doesn’t necessarily mean some people won’t smile. There could always be those people who smile regardless of whether they are happy or sad. Look at the original statement and concentrate on finding a similar structure.

Original Argument (fallacious):

final exam week → sell lots beer

(if it’s final exam week then the pub sells a lot of beer)

≠ final exam week → ≠ sell lots beer

(if it’s not final exam week then the pub does not sell lots of beer)

Now match this structure with correct choice D:

If happy → smile

≠ happy → ≠ smile

Back to problem

Problem 34: Balcony

Choice C. We are told that all apartments above the fifth floor have balconies. We cannot, however, logically infer that apartments on or below the fifth floor do not have balconies. Answer choices B and E provide tempting traps. For all we know, every apartment from the first floor on up has a balcony.

Author’s note: The statement, “If a person is rich, then he or she will vote in favor of a tax cut,” does not mean that if a person is poor he or she will not also vote in favor of a tax cut.

Tip #44 states that one way to think about an “If … then” statement in the form of “If A, then B” is that just because A leads to B does not mean that C, D, or E could not also lead to B. Case in point: The fact that increased expenditures on advertising have led to an increase in company sales does not mean that an increase in company sales could not have been achieved through other means — hiring more salespersons, lowering the retail price of products, or hiring a famous, talented manager.

Back to problem

Problem 35: Global Warming

Choice D. If we want to stop global warming then we must pass legislation. As foreshadowed by tip #45, we must draw an important distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions. Passing legislation is necessary to stopping global warming, but it is not a sufficient condition for doing so. It is not a sufficient condition because several other factors probably are necessary to stopping global warming. For starters, in all cases we may need more than just legislation; we may need legal enforcement of approved laws. Moreover, other factors may need to be present as well, such as the need to legislate to preserve forested areas. Furthermore, choice C is a near-identical restatement of the original statement. Answer choices A and B are all correct interpretations of Jacques’ original “If … then” statement. However, since Pierre believes Jacques’ statement is not true, we must look for an erroneous answer choice.

Choice E is an opposite answer choice. Pierre’s mistake consists in believing that legislation is the sole causal agent in stopping global warming (as opposed to one of several factors); his misunderstanding does not