Zarrolou wrote:
This is tough as almost all options reflect part of the reasoning, however only one is flawed.
Which of the following indicates a flaw in the author’s reasoning?
A) It relies on evidence about a specific place to make a recommendation about an entire class of such places.
This reflect the reasoning "Over 80% of children ages 4-14 who bathed in a particular sea called "The White Sea""=>avoid all Sea waters.
This is a legit reasoning, as the infection is linked with high-salinity sea water, so this recommendation makes sense.
B) It assumes that one possible cause of a condition is the only cause of that condition.
IMO CORRECT. The first line states: "A certain eye infection has been linked to exposure to a certain type of high-salinity sea water" => "the only way to completely avoid the infection is to refrain from bathing in "The White Sea" and other Sea waters altogether.".
We know that the infection has been linked to water, but could be linked to other factors as well, we don't know. But the passage excludes this possibility by stating that the ONLY way to avoid the infection is to refrain from sea water. This is a flawed reasoning.
C) It assumes to be true what it sets out to prove.
This is simply not the case.
D) It makes a generalization based on one segment of the population.
This reflects the line "Over 80% of children ages 4-14 who bathed in a particular sea called "The White Sea" have contracted the infection in varying levels of severity.". However the text does not say "because the children have contracted the infection everybody should avoid the sea water". The text does not generalize in such way.
E) It contradicts itself by proclaiming a condition to be not dangerous and then offering a recommendation to avoid that condition.
It's true that the passage says that the infection is not dangerous, but it says that is painful; so offering a recommendation to avoid it is not a flawed reasoning.
Which of the following indicates a flaw in the author’s reasoning?
A) It relies on evidence about a specific place to make a recommendation about an entire class of such places.
This reflect the reasoning "Over 80% of children ages 4-14 who bathed in a particular sea called "The White Sea""=>avoid all Sea waters.
This is a legit reasoning, as the infection is linked with high-salinity sea water, so this recommendation makes sense.
B) It assumes that one possible cause of a condition is the only cause of that condition.
IMO CORRECT. The first line states: "A certain eye infection has been linked to exposure to a certain type of high-salinity sea water" => "the only way to completely avoid the infection is to refrain from bathing in "The White Sea" and other Sea waters altogether.".
We know that the infection has been linked to water, but could be linked to other factors as well, we don't know. But the passage excludes this possibility by stating that the ONLY way to avoid the infection is to refrain from sea water. This is a flawed reasoning.
C) It assumes to be true what it sets out to prove.
This is simply not the case.
D) It makes a generalization based on one segment of the population.
This reflects the line "Over 80% of children ages 4-14 who bathed in a particular sea called "The White Sea" have contracted the infection in varying levels of severity.". However the text does not say "because the children have contracted the infection everybody should avoid the sea water". The text does not generalize in such way.
E) It contradicts itself by proclaiming a condition to be not dangerous and then offering a recommendation to avoid that condition.
It's true that the passage says that the infection is not dangerous, but it says that is painful; so offering a recommendation to avoid it is not a flawed reasoning.
However Cicero, Option D points out that the only conlusion offeered in the argument is based on a fact of onlye children for which data is available while option B is weaker as the link to only cause is equally undiagnosed and loop not closed..i would say bad question because D makes me skip the right answer likely B (:D thru no flaw of D :X)