An independent audit found no indication

Answer choices

1. A

   Different Flaw: Temporal9% picked this

   The plan for the introduction of the new project has been unmodified so far; therefore, it will not

   This argument feels more like it's committing what people call the Temporal Flaw: assuming that what has been true before will continue to be true. Since it hasn't been modified so far, it won't be modified in the future. Here, our objection is, "Maybe something is importantly different between now and then." Our objection to the original was "just because there's no evidence for X doesn't mean we can say X doesn't exist."

   9%
2. B

   Different Flaw: Part vs. Whole1% picked this

   The overall budget for the projects has been exceeded by a large amount; therefore, at least one of the projects has exceeded

   This feels like it's committing a different flaw from the ten famous ones: Part vs. Whole. Since the overall budget has a certain trait (exceeded by large amount), a certain part of the budget has that trait (exceeded by large amount). If the conclusion and evidence were talking about "exceeded by a large percentage", this wouldn't be a flawed argument. But since it's talking about amount, we don't need to believe that any one project has greatly exceeded its budget. It's possible that all the projects have exceeded their budgets by a small amount. That could still add up to the overall budget being exceeded by a large amount. But this mathematical objection, "It's possible for the whole to be much larger if all the parts are just slightly larger" has no similarity to the original argument, which was more like, "It's possible that X is true, even though one search for X came up dry."

   1%
3. C

   Different Flaw: Causal Flaw18% picked this

   A compilation of the best student essays of the year includes no essays on current events; therefore, students have

   This argument presents a Curious Fact (how come there are no essays on current events?) and then overconfidently concludes one possible causal explanation for that curious fact. That's the famous flaw we call Causal Flaw. We're looking for Unproven vs. Proven False.

   18%
4. D

   Different Flaw: Term Shift5% picked this

   A survey of schools in the district found no school without a need for building repair; therefore, the education provided to students

   This argument moves from "all schools need building repair" to "the education being provided is substandard". It's not clear what building-repair-condition has to do with quality of education. But this is a flaw of irrelevance. The original flaw was about a lack of evidence proving that something didn't exist.

   5%
5. E

   Correct67% picked this

   An examination of the index of the book found no listing for the most prominent critic of the theory the book advocates; therefore, the

   Why this is right

   Like the original argument, this involved a search for a certain thing. Someone was searching for tax avoidance. Someone was searching for a famous critic's name. They didn't find tax avoidance in the firm's accounts. They didn't find the critic's name in the index. Thus, they concluded, this firm doesn't have any tax avoidance. Thus, they concluded, this book doesn't have the critic's name in it. In addition to feeling like Unproven vs. Proven False (since both arguments proceed from a lack of evidence for X to a conclusion that X doesn't happen), it feels like both argument somewhat have a Part vs. Whole vibe as well. Just because you didn't find tax evasion in the firm's accounts doesn't mean there isn't tax evasion in the firm overall. Just because you didn't find the critic's name in the book's index doesn't mean the critic's name isn't in the book overall.

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

   67%