Logical reasoning PrepTest 156 · Section 2 · Question 9

Flawed

Argument or facts? Always argument, so identify premises and conclusions of argument Anticipate why the premises are not enough to prove that the conclusion is true.

Checking to see if a common logical fallacy is committed is very helpful.

On an Errors in Reasoning question, we should take the time to articulate why the premise or premises aren't enough to prove that the conclusion is true. To that end, we can examine whether the conclusion makes any bold claims or whether the argument relies on any reasoning techniques associated with common flaws. This question uses a correlation-to-causation argument structure. The conclusion is expressed in causal terms: restricting tobacco ads has "a significant impact on smoking among adults." If the restrictions impacted it, they caused the change. But, the premises only rely on a correlation. A survey shows that fewer adults smoke now than at any other time in the last 20 years, with the last 10 years showing the biggest reduction. Also, "the most important" restrictions on tobacco advertising appeared 10 years ago. Even if these similar dates point to a strong association, we can't say that the restrictions caused the reduction in smoking among adults. We can't say that because, among other reasons, many other things could have changed in the last 10 or 20 years. More health evidence on smoking's harmful effects, smoking becoming more expensive, restrictions on where you can smoke, etc., etc. The correct answer will likely point out that the argument confuses correlation for causation or that the argument overlooks other possible causes of a reduction in smoking among adults.