Bunuel
Since new environmental regulations were enacted last year, factories emitting pollutants above a certain level must install advanced filtration systems. Therefore, any factory that has not installed such a system since last year must be emitting pollutants below the required level.
The reasoning above exhibits a flaw similar to one in which of the following?
A. Any animal classified as a reptile must be cold-blooded, so if an animal is not cold-blooded, it cannot be classified as a reptile.
B. All licensed drivers must pass a driving test, and since Jorge has passed a driving test, he must be a licensed driver.
C. A person who is an elected official must reside in the district they represent, so anyone who does not reside in a particular district cannot be an elected official there.
D. Every person entering the country must go through customs; therefore, the increase in the number of customs agents will necessarily lead to a decrease in the number of people entering the country.
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
The reasoning in the original argument is flawed because it assumes that if factories are required to install filtration systems if they emit pollutants above a certain level, then any factory that has not installed such a system must be emitting pollutants below the required level. This is a logical flaw because there could be other reasons why a factory hasn't installed the system, such as non-compliance or evasion of the regulations.
Let's analyze each option to find a similar logical flaw:
A. Any animal classified as a reptile must be cold-blooded, so if an animal is not cold-blooded, it cannot be classified as a reptile.
- This reasoning is valid. It correctly follows that if being cold-blooded is a necessary condition for being a reptile, then not being cold-blooded means the animal cannot be a reptile.
B. All licensed drivers must pass a driving test, and since Jorge has passed a driving test, he must be a licensed driver.
- This is flawed reasoning. Passing a driving test is a necessary condition for being a licensed driver, but it does not guarantee that someone who has passed the test is a licensed driver (they might not have applied for the license yet).
C. A person who is an elected official must reside in the district they represent, so anyone who does not reside in a particular district cannot be an elected official there.
- This reasoning is valid. If residing in the district is a necessary condition for being an elected official, then not residing there means one cannot be an elected official there.
D. Every person entering the country must go through customs; therefore, the increase in the number of customs agents will necessarily lead to a decrease in the number of people entering the country.
- This reasoning is flawed but not in the same way. It incorrectly assumes a cause-and-effect relationship without evidence.
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
- This reasoning is flawed and similar to the original argument. It assumes that not undergoing drug testing means the person is not a professional athlete, ignoring other possible reasons for not undergoing the testing (e.g., evading the tests).
Therefore, the correct answer is:
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.