Logical reasoning PrepTest 116 · Section 3 · Question 20

Incorrect. First, the Spokesperson's earlier comment suggests that they are standard when she talks about any modern computer, not just those of one company. Second, the Spokesperson highlights a change to a new design process, so what was true of the process may no longer be true.

Incorrect. The Spokesperson's conclusion is that there won't be further design flaws, so other flaws are out of scope. This answer would be correct if the Spokesperson's premises were about design flaws with a conclusion about all flaws.

Incorrect. The Spokesperson's conclusion is about microprocessor design flaws, so other reasons for a computer to fail are out of scope.

Incorrect. The Spokesperson concludes that there won't be future flaws, so she definitely doesn't assume this answer to be true.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Question/Answer/Question/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
NA/NA/NA/Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
I: A company released a bad microprocessor — how?
IS: We can't check them all by hand.
I: So how do we know it won't happen again?
IS: New microprocessors are designed by computer, so it can't happen again.

Answer Anticipation:
This back—and—forth interview about a poorly designed microprocessor leads to an argument—finally—in the last statement made by the Industry Spokesperson. There, she claims that, despite a current generation of microprocessors being released with a flawed design, the same can't happen in the future.

Why not? Well, while the old microprocessors had too many circuits to check them all manually, the new microprocessors are entirely designed by a computer. However, there's no indication that a computer is able to design a circuit without any flaws in it. Any answer pointing this out will serve to point out the complete lack of a supporting premise for this conclusion.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights the flaw—that the Spokesperson assumes a computer—designed microprocessor won't have any flaws. But what's the evidence to the contrary? It's been established that computers have been released with design flaws that result in that computer processing information incorrectly—so we have evidence that computers can make mistakes. That's evidence against the claim that a computer—designed microprocessor won't design something incorrectly.

Key Takeaway:
Don't get too wrapped up in a super long stimulus, as we have here. The argument asks us to find a flaw in the Spokesperson's argument, and that was just a sentence at the end of the interview.