Last visit was: 09 Jul 2025, 03:24 It is currently 09 Jul 2025, 03:24
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Hovkial
Joined: 23 Apr 2019
Last visit: 24 Nov 2022
Posts: 803
Own Kudos:
2,289
 [13]
Given Kudos: 202
Status:PhD trained. Education research, management.
Posts: 803
Kudos: 2,289
 [13]
Kudos
Add Kudos
13
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
Fatineel
Joined: 22 Sep 2018
Last visit: 02 Feb 2021
Posts: 42
Own Kudos:
14
 [2]
Given Kudos: 139
Location: Morocco
Posts: 42
Kudos: 14
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
OJA
Joined: 21 Aug 2024
Last visit: 08 Jul 2025
Posts: 33
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 220
Posts: 33
Kudos: 6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Yosemite98
Joined: 28 Jan 2025
Last visit: 06 Jul 2025
Posts: 56
Own Kudos:
22
 [2]
Given Kudos: 28
Location: Spain
Concentration: Technology
GMAT Focus 1: 655 Q86 V82 DI79
GMAT Focus 1: 655 Q86 V82 DI79
Posts: 56
Kudos: 22
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hovkial
Political philosopher: A just system of taxation would require each person’s contribution to correspond directly to the amount the society as a whole contributes to serve that person’s interests. For purposes of taxation, wealth is the most objective way to determine how well the society has served the interest of any individual. Therefore, each person should be taxed solely in proportion to her or his income.

The flawed reasoning in the political philosopher’s argument is most similar to that in which one of the following?

(A) Cars should be taxed in proportion to the danger that they pose. The most reliable measure of this danger is the speed at which a car can travel. Therefore, cars should be taxed only in proportion to their ability to accelerate quickly.

(B) People should be granted autonomy in proportion to their maturity. A certain psychological test was designed to provide an objective measure of maturity. Therefore, those scoring above high school level on the test should be granted complete autonomy.

(C) Everyone should pay taxes solely in proportion to the benefits they receive from government. Many government programs provide subsidies for large corporations. Therefore, a just tax would require corporations to pay a greater share of their income in taxes than individual citizens pay.

(D) Individuals who confer large material benefits upon society should receive high incomes. Those with high incomes should pay correspondingly high taxes. Therefore, we as a society should place high taxes on activities that confer large benefits upon society.

(E) Justice requires that health care be given in proportion to each individual’s need. Therefore, we need to ensure that the most seriously ill hospital patients are given the highest priority for receiving care.


Original Argument:
  1. Premise 1: A just tax system should have each person pay in proportion to how much society benefits them.
  2. Premise 2: Wealth is the best objective proxy for how much someone has benefited from society.
  3. Conclusion: Therefore, people should be taxed only in proportion to income.
The Flaw:
The philosopher switches from "wealth" (which was proposed as the best proxy for societal benefit) to "income" (which is different from wealth) in the conclusion — without justification. This is a category shift or equivocation between two related but distinct measures.

Now let’s look for an answer choice with a similar flaw: using one concept as the relevant measure, then basing the conclusion on a different or narrower measure without justification.

Evaluate the Options:
(A)
Quote:
Cars should be taxed in proportion to the danger that they pose. The most reliable measure of this danger is the speed at which a car can travel. Therefore, cars should be taxed only in proportion to their ability to accelerate quickly.
  • Flaw match?
    Yes. The premise uses top speed as the best proxy for danger, but the conclusion shifts to acceleration — a different (though related) measure, just like wealth vs. income.
  • This mirrors the original flaw.
(B)
Quote:
People should be granted autonomy in proportion to maturity. A test measures maturity. Therefore, those who score above high school level get full autonomy.
  • This is about applying a threshold, not switching from one concept to a different one. No clear equivocation.
  • Different kind of flaw.
(C)
Quote:
Everyone should pay taxes in proportion to benefits from government. Corporations get many benefits. Therefore, corporations should pay more.
  • This actually follows logically under the given premise. There is no category switch or flawed inference.
  • Not flawed in the same way.
(D)
Quote:
People who help society should get high income. High income means high taxes. Therefore, we should tax socially beneficial activities.
  • This is a mismatch of logic, but it’s more of a normative leap than a category shift.
  • Different flaw.
(E)
Quote:
Healthcare should be proportional to need. Therefore, the sickest patients should get priority.
  • This is a straightforward and logical application of the principle.
  • No flawed reasoning.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7349 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts