"If you know a lot of history, it will be easy for you to impress people who are intellectuals."
KLH ==> EII not EII ==> not KLH
"But unfortunately, you will not know much about history if you have not, for example, read a large number of history books."
not RLNHB ==> not KLH KLH ==> RLNHB
"Therefore, if you are not well versed in history due to a lack of reading, it will not be easy for you to impress people who are intellectuals."
not RLNHB ==> not KLH ==> not EII
Notice the flaw here. Not KLH is our necessary condition in both premises so its existence tell us nothing (don't just reverse!).
The author is assuming the first premise is not KLH ==> not EII (i.e. mistaking sufficient and necessary conditions).
The contrapositive is EII ==> KLH (i.e. the only way to easily impress intellectuals is to know a lot of history).
This is why (D) is the correct answer. The argument is overlooking the possibility that there are other easy ways to impress intellectuals that do not involve knowing history (i.e. knowing a lot of history is NOT the only way to easily impress intellectuals).
(B) is incorrect for a couple of reasons. First, learning about history is not the same as knowing a lot of history. Additionally, just because it will be easy for you to impress people who are intellectuals, doesn't mean you actually will.
But even ignoring these two issues, (B) would not be a flaw because the author wouldn't be overlooking this because it cannot be true. If you know a lot of history, it is will be easy for you to impress people who are intellectuals.
Hope that helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions.
Anna20June 12, 2020
Hi @Mehran, team - thank you for this. I am not sure I understand how to go from recognising the flaw in the way this is diagrammed, to then being able to choose the answer choice (D) and understanding that this means there are other ways to impress intellectuals? Grateful if you could kindly explain further how to make that connection?
