Paleomycologists, scientists who study ancient forms of fungi, are invariably acquainted with the scholarly publicati...

shafieiava on February 26, 2020


Can you diagram this question? During my first attempt of the question I didn't see clear diagrammable statements, but at a second glance the flawed parallel reasoning I believe is being shown is just reverses? I diagrammed the stimulus as P>ASP; ASP; Therefore P. Then I diagrammed the correct answer as GAD> CFD; CFD; Therefore GAD. Which to my understanding also just reverses. Can someone confirm my analysis of the stimulus and correct answer here? Thanks in advance.

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Ravi on February 26, 2020


Happy to help. Here's how I'd diagram this question:

Premise 1: Paleomycologist - >Acquainted with publications of all other

Premise 2: Mansour - >Acquainted with the publication of a
paleomycologist (Professor DeAngelis)

Conclusion: Mansour - >Paleomycologist

We can simply the structure of this argument to

Premise 1: A - >B

Premise 2: C - >D

Conclusion: C - >A

This is obviously a flawed argument structure. We need to find the
answer choice that mirrors this flawed structure.

(A) says, "When a flight on Global Airlines is delayed, all connecting
Global Airlines flights are also delayed so that the passengers can
make their connections. Since Frieda’s connecting flight on Global was
delayed, her first flight must have also been a delayed Global
Airlines flight."

Here's how we can diagram (A):

Premise 1: Delayed flight on Global Airlines - >Delayed connecting flight

Premise 2: Freida's flight - >Delayed connecting flight on Global Airlines

Conclusion: Freida's Flight - >Delayed flight on Global Airlines

This structure simplifies to

Premise 1: A - >B

Premise 2: C - >D

Conclusion: C - >A

This matches the flawed structure we found in the stimulus, so (A) is
the correct answer choice.

Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any other questions!