A corporation created a new division.

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match11% picked this

   In order to obtain the best players for its country’s Olympic team, a committee reviewed the performance of its country’s teams. After reviewing statistics

   This conclusion is saying "The six best players have been chosen". That is still a conclusion about individuals, not about a collective. If the argument were "We selected the six best players, therefore this will be the best team", then we'd have a match.

   11%
2. B

   Bad Evidence Match5% picked this

   Several salespeople were given incentives to recruit the largest number of new customers in one month. To monitor the incentive program, the boss interviewed

   This conclusion is saying "The incentive program was effective". Could 'the incentive program' be considered a collective? Yeah, potentially. That means that our premise should sound like, "Each part of the incentive program was effective". But the evidence sounds nothing like that; it's just about one of the salespeople involved in the program.

   5%
3. C

   Bad Evidence Match26% picked this

   A law firm decided to add a department devoted to family law. To obtain the best employees it could, the firm studied the credentials

   This conclusion is saying "This will be one of the best family-law departments." That is definitely a collective. Is the evidence saying "each member of this family-law department is one of the best"? No. It's saying that the staff is a collective that is designed to match the collectives of other successful family law departments. This isn't really going from "because these parts are one of the best, this collective will be one of the best". It's saying, "We studied the best collectives. We tried to assemble a similar collective. So this should be one of the best collectives."

   26%
4. D

   Correct58% picked this

   To put together this year’s two All-Star Teams, the best players in the league were selected. Half of them were put on Team One,

   Why this is right

   This replicates the Part to Whole flaw. We establish that each player on the two teams was one of the best players, and then conclude that the teams are the best. Just like in the original argument, we have no idea whether these hotshot individual players will blend well as a collective, so it's hasty to think that the collectives will be "best" just because the individual parts are.

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

   58%
5. E

   Bad Evidence Match1% picked this

   Various schools chose teams of students to compete in a debate tournament. Each school’s team presented a position and rebutted the others’ positions. After

   This conclusion is saying "It was the best team". So the evidence needs to say that "each part of the team is the best". But the evidence here says that "one team emerged with the highest average score".

   1%