Critical Reasoning
Verbal Ability

 Back to Questions

In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which ofthe following criticisms?


It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of information provided in its support.


It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.


It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes.


It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.


It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

 Hide Ans

Option(C) is correct

Option A : The conclusion is not merely a paraphrase of the pieces of information provided in its support. Indeed, the problem with the argument is that the conclusion goes too far beyond what the premises merit.

Option B : The premises of the argument are not inconsistent with one another.

Option C :  Correct. This accurately describes the flaw in the argument because the reasons givenin the argument for its conclusion would be good reasons only "there were no other plausible explanations for Parland's greater labor productivity.

Option D : The argument does not mention how long Parland has had more productive labor, or when technological improvements would have occurred.

Option E : Neither of the premises contains anything that presupposes the conclusion to be true.

The correct answer is C.

(0) Comment(s)