Parallel Flaw

 

요주의 문제:

PT51 S1 Q20 (B)

 

Parts->Whole

PT FEB 97 S1 Q24 (C)

PT28 S1 Q3 (probability of a member of a set -> probability of the entire set.)

PT30 S2 Q6 (B)

PT27 S4 Q13 (D)

PT17 S3 Q19 (Quality vs. Quantity, if two ACs have similar structure, then match the detailed parts).

PT47 S3 Q25

PT53 S3 Q13 (B)

 

Whole->Parts

PT14 S4 Q14

PTA S4 Q14

PT47 S1 Q21

PT54 S2 Q8 (C)

 

Takes probability as certainty, fails to consider unintended outcomes.

PT22 S4 Q6 (C)

PT28 S1 Q3 (A) (a property of a member -> a property of a set)

 

Probability

PT41 S3 Q8 (B)

 

Fails to Consider Other Possibilities

PT33 S3 Q18, (One benefit ---> purely benefit) (B)

PT25 S2 Q2 (C)(Element of “Lack of Evidence for a Position is Taken to Prove that Position is False/True”), Superlative vs. Absolute components as well.

PT9 S4 Q24

PT12 S4 Q23

 

Can Cause -> Did Cause, Correlation->Causation, Fails to consider probabilities

PT27 S1 Q11 (B)

 

Correlation -> Causation

PT22 S2 Q23 (E) (Correlation->Causation->Prescription, 3 parts to match.)

PT8 S1 Q25 (False Analogy as well.)

PT1 S4 Q10

 

Causation (assuming only 1 cause for 1 outcome.)

PT25 S4 Q12 (D)

 

Phenomenon/Causation possibly reversed

PT23 S3 Q23 (B) (Phenomenon/Causation possibly reversed. Take note of the factors. Stimulus(2): Money, Traffic. AC B(2): Hours, hires/play, AC D(3): Hours, Time, Wins.)

 

Average vs. Individual

PT24 S2 Q5 (D)

 

Improper Conditional Reasoning

PT19 S2 Q22 (D) (Repeat, sufficient condition has not been met)

PT13 S4 Q15 (Contrapositive)

 

Modifier/Word Mismatch, Conditional Reasoning

PT19 S2 Q22 (D)

PT15 S2 Q4

PT46 S3 Q19 (E), A->B, A*, Therefore, B.

PT52 S1 Q16 (A), / existence -> /belief implied

PT82 S1 Q16

 

Affirming the Consequent (M.R.)

PT33 S1 Q15 (C)

PT31 S2 Q21 (C) (Modifiers are important)

Similar Question: PT71 S1 Q21 (C), Modifier important.

PT32 S4 Q21 (A) (Variation, the more the better concept involved.)

PT40 S3 Q17

PT18 S4 Q3 (E)

PT10 S4 Q5

PT15 S3 Q22 (Most concept used)

PT2 S4 Q22

PT7 S1 Q20 (Affirming the Consequent is presumed)

PT12 S1 Q17

PT61 S4 Q26 (B)

 

A + B -> C. A, C. Therefore, B. (Variation of M.R.)

PT20 S1 Q17 (D)

 

Denying the Antecedent (M.N.)

PT26 S3 Q13 (E)

PT21 S2 Q21 (A) (High Level Variation)

PT28 S3 Q21 (D)

PT34 S3 Q23 (D) (Different Terms used in each conditional reasoning to confuse test-takers.)

PT10 S1 Q20

PT5 S1 Q22

PT16 S2 Q7

PT6 S3 Q10

PT11 S4 Q20

PT13 S2 Q23

PT57 S3 Q15 (C)

 

A->B, A->C, Not C, Not B. Mistaken Negation variation.

PT53 S1 Q21 (A)

 

Property of Affirming the Consequent (M.R.)

Each element of Class A can be matched up with one or more elements in Class B, that one element in Class B can be matched up with all elements in Class A.

A(single) -> B(single or plural). Therefore, B(single) -> A(plural).

PT35 S1 Q24 (C)

 

A -> B some C. A some C.

PT19 S4 Q21 (C)

PT2 S2 Q20

 

Some, Some. A some B Some C. A Some C.

PT26 S2 Q20 (C)

 

Some, Most. A some B Most C. A some C.

PT29 S4 Q21 (Few) (C)

 

Most, Most. A most B most C. A most C.

PT32 S1 Q22 (D)

PT17 S2 Q16 (B)

 

A Most B. B likely A.

PT54 S2 Q21 (A)

 

A –> B most C. A most C.

PT61 S2 Q23 (D)

 

A -> Not B. A Most C. B Some Not C. (Correct version: C some Not B). Reversed.

PT29 S1 Q23 (B) (Most, Chain) The AC I overlooked because it looked wrong at surface.

 

A Some /C. B some /C. A&B some /C.

PT59 S3 Q15 (C)

 

Lack of Evidence for a Position is Taken to Prove that Position is False/True

PT23 S2 Q23 (E)

PT31 S3 Q23 (C) (Variation).

All reject ‘A.’ Another person rejects ‘A,’ but fails making a good case. Thus, ‘A’ might be true.

PT24 S3 Q16 (A)

PT57 S2 Q8 (E)

 

False Comparison

PT26 S2 Q20

 

Matching premises and the conclusion

PT30 S4 Q25 (A) (Induction) (Other ACs are blatantly wrong).

PT18 S2 Q17 (C)

PT9 S2 Q1 (Fails to consider other possibilities.)

 

Mutual Exclusivity Error

PT40 S1 Q20

 

Source Attack

PT8 S4 Q3

PT21 S2 Q15 (A) (Variation. Indirect Involvement.)

PT38 S4 Q17 (B)

PT55 S1 Q1 (B), Specific Type.

 

False Dichotomy

PT21 S3 Q25 (E)

PT39 S4 Q26 (D)

PT11 S2 Q17

 

Distortion

PT34 S2 Q24, (intention problem) (B)

 

A is a copy of B. Therefore, C cannot reproduce a good copy of A.

PT36 S1 Q21

 

Appeal to Wrong Authority

PT20 S4 Q20 (E)

 

The person saying it might not be telling the truth

PT6 S2 Q5

 

Flaw Except

PT4 S1 Q24

 

Improvement oneself -> best among all

PT7 S4 Q14

 

Conclusion does not follow from the premise, Ignores a premise

PT14 S2 Q25

 

Using product A is better than Not using product A. Therefore, A is the best product.

PTA S1 Q22

 

Arguing Apples using Oranges as evidence. Apples are bad because oranges are bad.

PTB S1 Q22

 

Subjective View vs. Objective View

 

Matching Abstract Logic

PT35 S4 Q6(Phenomenon – Explanation – Prescription Justified), (B)

 

‘A’ does not completely solves the problem, only mitigates it. Therefore, ‘A’ should not be used.

PT38 S1 Q16 (D)

 

Many not P. So, Never P.

PT41 S1 Q23 (A)

 

A is capable of C. B can do C too. B is a type of A.

PT55 S3 Q23 (C)

 

Matching two parts

PT C2 S3 Q23 (B)