Logical reasoning PrepTest 155 · Section 4 · Question 2

Incorrect. There's no self-appointed expert in the stimulus—Brian read something, but we're not told who wrote it.

Incorrect. The conclusion is about the healthiness of bread + meat, but the premise is about the two having an impact on digestion. Those aren't the same, so this argument isn't circular. Additionally, the premise is about what Brian read, and the conclusion is a statement of truth.

Incorrect. The effect here is "unhealthiness," but nothing is stated as necessary for that. If anything, Brian says that the bread + meat combo is sufficient to make something unhealthy.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Brian concludes that eating bread and meat together is unhealthy because he swapped his fast-food diet for one of lean meats, fruits, and vegetables and saw his health improve.

Answer Anticipation:
The conclusion is causal here—eating bread and meat together causes bad health. Causal conclusions are always suspect, frequently because they ignore alternative causes. Here, it probably wasn't the bread + meat combo that was unhealthy, but rather the overall difference between a cheeseburger and fries vs. ground turkey and brussels sprouts. Some whole grain toast with that turkey wouldn't have ruined the diet.

Answer Explanation:
This is our causal error answer. While Brian did stop eating bread and meat together, he also stopped eating fast food and started eating healthier food, which probably had more of an impact.

Key Takeaway:
When a flawed argument has a causal conclusion—especially when it doesn't have causal premises—there's a good chance that the correct answer will deal with alternative causes.

Incorrect. Since Brian mentions that his health improved, this answer doesn't reflect the argument.