Conclusion: "postal service is so underpriced that a five-cent increase is unworthy of serious debate."
Why? "Few experiences are more enjoyable than reading a personal letter from a friend."
What's the issue here? In order to prove that the 5-cent increase in postal rates should not be worthy of serious debate, the argument explains how wonderful the value of enjoying a personal letter is. However, the value of the letter should not have an effect on the value of delivering the letter.
For example, no matter how wonderful and artisanal "ice cream A" is, its value has no effect on a price hike on the delivery of the product. In order to justify a price increase on the delivery, one should bring forth evidence of the value of the delivery, e.g. the delivery is done quickly and efficiently.
So, the reasoning of the argument is flawed because the value of one thing is being justified by comparing it to the value of delivering that thing. This is exactly what answer choice (C) describes: "confuses the value of the object delivered, i.e. the letter, with the value of delivering that object, i.e. the postal service." No matter how wonderful the letter is, that doesn't necessarily justify the postal service increasing its prices.
Hope that helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions.
AdvaithNovember 3, 2015
What logical flaw is this?
MehranNovember 9, 2015
In layman's terms, comparing apples and oranges. See above for more details. Hope that helps.
