Please explain

@Steph, Happy to help. The stimulus is saying that on average, city bus drivers who are using the new computerized fare system are more punctual than are ones who are using the old collection system. Millicent Smith is the most punctual city bus driver, so the argument concludes she has to be using the computerized fare system. See the flaw? This is a whole-to-part flaw. On average, sure, the bus drivers using the computerized system are more timely; however, this does not mean that every single city bus driver with above average punctuality uses the computerized fare system. There could be an outlier bus driver using the old fare system who is more timely than all of the bus drivers who use the computerized fare system, so this argument contains the whole-to-part flaw. The question asks, "Which one of the following contains flawed reasoning most similar to that contained in the argument above?" We know that the stimulus has a whole-to-part flaw, so we just need to find an answer choice that also has a whole-to-part flaw in it. (A) says, "All the city’s solid waste collection vehicles acquired after 1988 have a larger capacity than any of those acquired before 1988. This vehicle has the largest capacity of any the city owns, so it must have been acquired after 1988." This argument is really close to being valid. If the city bought a vehicle after '88, then it's bigger than every vehicle prior to '88. We also know that any single vehicle bought after '88 is larger than any vehicle before '88, we know the largest vehicle can't come from '88. However, the largest vehicle could be from the year '88 itself since the premise gives us no information about '88. This argument doesn't exhibit the whole-to-part flaw of the stimulus, so we can get rid of it. (B) says, "The soccer players on the blue team are generally taller than the players on the gold team. Since Henri is a member of the blue team, he is undoubtedly taller than most of the members of the gold team." This is a tricky answer choice, but it doesn't match up to the stimulus because the stimulus tells us that Millicent has a certain characteristic (being the most on-time) and concludes from that that she is a member of the group using the new computerized fare system because that group on average is more timely. (B), however, makes a flaw in the reverse (part-to-whole) direction, as it says that Henri is a member of a particular group (the blue team) and concludes that he has a trait (taller than most of the members of the gold team). Because the flaw is done in the reverse direction, we can get rid of (B). (C) says, "This tomato is the largest of this year’s crop. Since the tomatoes in the experimental plot are on average larger than those grown in the regular plots, this tomato must have been grown in the experimental plot." The flaw in (C) matches our stimulus flaw (whole to part) really well. It says that one particular tomato is the largest and says that since the experimental plot has tomatoes that are on average larger than those in the regular plots, this tomato must be from the experimental plot. This is the same type of flaw (whole to part) that we found in the stimulus, and it's the correct answer. Unlike (B), the flaw in (C) goes in the right direction. (D) says, "Last week’s snowstorm in Toronto was probably an average storm for the area. It was certainly heavier than any snowstorm known to have occurred in Miami, but any average snowstorm in Toronto leaves more snow than ever falls in Miami." This argument is different from the type of argument we saw in the stimulus because it attempts to conclude that last week's snowstorm was average instead of attempting to place the snowstorm into part of a larger group of snowstorms, which is the type of flaw (whole to part) that the stimulus does. As a result, we can get rid of (D). (E) says, "Lawn mowers powered by electricity generally require less maintenance than do lawn mowers powered by gasoline. This lawn mower is powered by gasoline, so it will probably require a lot of maintenance." The problem with (E) is that it switches gears from comparing the maintenance between two types of mowers to making an absolute claim about gas mowers needing lots of maintenance. This is not the whole to part flaw found in the stimulus, so we can get rid of this choice. Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any questions!