PrepTest 130

Incorrect. The argument allows for prices to change—the market can go up and down, but one company's parts can still be priced above competitors.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Our equipment is outdated, making our parts more expensive—and we need to make them more competitive to survive. We could lower prices with a factory overhaul. Therefore, we must refurbish the factory to survive.

Answer Anticipation:
The conclusion makes a definitive recommendation—the company must do something to survive. While the argument does establish that the company has to get their products more competitively priced in order to survive, the Manager never establishes that a factory refurb is the only way to accomplish that—just one way. In jumping from raising one possible solution to treating it as if it were the only solution, the argument uses a Weak Premise to support a much stronger conclusion.

Answer Explanation:
The Manager raises one way to get their prices more competitive—refurbish the factory. From that, she concludes that the factory must be refurbished. That's a jump from a potential solution to a required solution, as this answer choice highlights, so it correctly points out the flaw in the argument.

Key Takeaway:
Whenever a conclusion makes a recommendation, always think about alternative approaches. This is especially true when the conclusion treats an option as the only potential option, as there are almost always other effective approaches out there.

Incorrect. The argument establishes a causal relationship as a premise, so it doesn't reverse it (outdated equipment causes parts to be more expensive).

Incorrect. The argument does recommend a solution to the problem of their part pricing being too high, but it does so after establishing a cause of that problem—outdated manufacturing equipment.

Incorrect. There's hardly a more definite recommendation than, "We must refurbish to survive."