The plant manager’s argument is

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct74% picked this

   The overall conclusion is about a net effect but is based solely on evidence about only some of the factors

   Why this is right

   Is the overall conclusion about a net effect? Sure, it says "overall this new process will bring the company no profit". Since profit is the same as "net revenue" (i.e. Revenue - Expenses), it's true that a conclusion about profit is a conclusion about a net effect. Did the evidence only consider some factors that contribute to higher/lower profit? Yes, it only covered the expense of buying / installing and the expense of processing costs. It fails to consider other categories of expense (maybe the environmental taxes on sulfur emissions are lower) and it fails to consider revenue (maybe the new process would output copper that is better and sells for more than the current process does). Since this answer choice accurately describes the argument and that description points to a potential way that the conclusion could be wrong, this answer is legit.

   Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   74%
2. B

   Bad Evidence Match Not Inappropriate Appeal3% picked this

   The support for the overall conclusion is the authority of the plant manager rather than

   This answer seems to allude to one of the 10 famous flaws, an Inappropriate Appeal (to emotion or in this case to a dubious authority). But the evidence wasn't just the plant manager's authority. The evidence was about the high costs of buying / installing / running the new equipment.

   3%
3. C

   Not Circular4% picked this

   The overall conclusion reached merely repeats the

   This answer describes one of the 10 famous flaws, Circular Reasoning, in which the premise restates the conclusion or requires the conclusion to be true. This answer is almost always wrong. This conclusion talks about profit. None of the evidence mentions profit. So there's no way that this conclusion is merely repeating the evidence.

   4%
4. D

   Trap6% picked this

   Evidence that is taken to be only probably true is used as the basis for a claim that

   Bad Evidence/Conclusion Match Not Probable vs. Certain This answer refers to a semi-famous flaw we might call Possible vs. Probable vs. Certain. This hasn't been a correct answer in many, many years. Was the evidence saying that something was probable? No, the evidence said that it costs a lot to buy / install / run this new smelting process. That's enough of a mismatch to say goodbye to this answer.

   6%
5. E

   Out of Scope: irrelevant premises13% picked this

   Facts that are not directly relevant to the argument are treated as if they supported

   The two premises are saying that it's expensive to buy, install, and run this new smelting equipment. New Expenses associated with X are definitely relevant to a conclusion that is talking about whether X would be profitable.

   13%