PrepTest 156

This answer choice matches our anticipation, even if it uses much more generic terms than we predicted. The author assumes that because a set of things has a certain property (i.e., the software industry, a set of companies, is growing rapidly), each member of that set has the property (i.e., that a specific software company must be growing rapidly). This is flawed (or an "illicit" presumption) because there might be some software companies that aren't doing well, even if the industry is flourishing.

Since this answer choice matches our anticipation, we can justifiably select it and advance straight to the following question.

This is a very tempting answer choice, as this argument asserts several "if-then" statements. However, once we diagrammed these statements, we didn't find any issues with the use of "if" and "then" conditions. The author never assumes that one of the "necessary" conditions for being innovative ("creative employees or management open to new ideas") is also "sufficient" for being innovative. That would look like this:

"If a company is innovative, its management must be open to new ideas. Logichut's management is open to new ideas, so it must be innovative."

That's not how this argument progresses. The author doesn't conclude that an "if" condition must be true — a tell-tale sign the argument commits the flaw described by (B) — so this isn't an accurate description of the argument's flaw.

This doesn't describe an error in the author's reasoning. The author never claims that "many people believe" anything. The author says Logichut "is said to have no creative employees." But even if that counts as "many people believing" something, the author prefaces the conclusion by saying, "If so." In other words, the author presumes that Logichut has no creative employees. The author never says Logichut definitely has no creative employees.

Like (B), this is a very tempting answer choice, given the multiple "if-then" statements in this argument. However, our diagramming didn't reveal any issues with the author's use of "if" and "then" conditions. The author doesn't assume that one of the "necessary" conditions for growing rapidly (innovation, creative employees, or management open to new ideas) is also "sufficient" for growing rapidly. That would look like this:

"If a company is growing rapidly, it must be innovative. Logichut is innovative, so it must be growing rapidly."

That doesn't resemble the argument in the passage. The author never concludes that an "if" condition must be true — a sure sign the argument commits the flaw described by (D) — so this doesn't capture the argument's flaw.

When an Errors in Reasoning answer choice begins "overlooks the possibility," we should ask, "Would this weaken the author's argument if true?"

This wouldn't weaken the author's argument. Even if a software company could have both creative employees and a management that is open to new ideas, that wouldn't change any conclusion we could draw about Logichut. The author's conclusion presumes that Logichut doesn't have creative employees, so the existence of a company with both creative employees and management open to new ideas is irrelevant to Logichut.

Since this answer choice wouldn't weaken the argument, we can eliminate it.