I got the answer correct for this question, but not because of "overlooking counter evidence." I saw percentages so I immediately started thinking about an erroneous jump between percentages and amounts. So wouldn't this be a "percentage v. amount" ?
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Careful- it is good to be cautious but we cannot assume that there is a "percentage v. amount" flaw just because we see percentages mentioned. The math is correct here, so although there are percentages included in the reasoning, there is no percentage-related flaw. Instead, when we evaluate the passage as a whole, we see that the flaw is overlooking counterevidence.
Does that make sense? Please let us know if you have any other questions!
IngridBrazilFebruary 20, 2021
I have a question related to that. When I go through the "33 Fallacies" book, I didn't really see the"overlooking counterevidence" flaw in there. I assume it's a different terminology but can't really figure out which fallacy or "family" this one would fall into...
