PrepTest 156, Section 4, Question 23
The computer software industry is rapidly growing and(54 more words not shown)
The reasoning in the argument(5 more words not shown)
- Aillicitly presumes that(17 more words not shown)
- Bconfuses a necessary(15 more words not shown)
- Cillicitly concludes that(9 more words not shown)
- Dconfuses a necessary(17 more words not shown)
- Eoverlooks the possibility(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The industry is growing. Is Logichut?
A booming industry can contain a struggling company. Plenty of software firms might be expanding while Logichut stays the same size or loses business. Being part of the industry doesn't give each company the industry's overall growth.
That matters because the rest of the argument starts with a requirement for a rapidly growing company. Such a company must be innovative, which requires creative employees or management open to new ideas. If we knew Logichut was growing rapidly and lacked creative employees, we could use that chain to require open-minded management.
What we’re looking for
But we don't know the first part. What if Logichut isn't growing and has neither creative employees nor receptive management? The rules about what growth requires wouldn't rule that out. For the flaw question, look for the unsupported assumption that Logichut shares the growth of the industry.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The 'set' is the software industry, and the member we care about is Logichut. The argument transfers the industry's overall rapid growth to this particular company. Once that transfer is questioned, the reasoning about what Logichut's growth requires no longer has a starting point. The company might not be growing at all.
- B
Creative employees or receptive management are described as requirements for innovation. The argument doesn't say that having one of those features automatically guarantees innovation. Its attempted reasoning goes from supposed growth to innovation and then to the required features. The problem is the unsupported growth, not turning a requirement into a guarantee.
- C
The argument doesn't use popularity as proof. It reports that Logichut is said to lack creative employees, then reasons conditionally: 'If so.' That isn't an argument that a claim must be true because many people believe it. The mistake concerns the industry's growth and the individual company's growth.
- D
The argument treats innovation as something rapid growth requires. It doesn't infer rapid growth merely from finding innovation. Instead, it assumes the rapid growth and tries to carry its requirements through to management. That assumed starting point is unsupported, but the direction of the growth-and-innovation rule isn't reversed.
- E
The argument can allow a company to have both creative employees and open-minded management. In Logichut's particular case, it is considering what follows if creative employees are absent. Allowing both generally doesn't prevent requiring the other feature when one is missing—provided the company has the growth that triggers the requirements. That is the fact the argument failed to establish.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.