| Critical Reasoning Butler: February 2025 |
| February 9 | CR 1 | CR 2 |
__________________________
CR 1 In an interview to a business daily, a senior manager at Windsor Hotels recently stated that the hotel is mishandled, sharing as proof the hotel’s inability to modify its marketing strategy in response to a recent increase in its number of unoccupied rooms. A senior manager’s negative comments are generally detrimental to the image of the company, but in this case, the negative comments were not justified. It is correct that
an increased number of unoccupied rooms at a hotel often indicates that the hotel is losing clients to competitors, but in Windsor’s situation, it does not showcase such a thing. Instead,
the increase in the number of unoccupied rooms is completely attributable to the cancellation of two of the city’s biggest events earlier this year. In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
(A) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second is evidence that has been used to support the position opposed by the argument as a whole.
(B) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states that conclusion.
(C) The first and the second each provide evidence against the position opposed by the argument as a whole.
(D) The first states a generalization that underlies the position opposed by the argument as a whole; the second provides evidence to show that the generalization is inapplicable in the case at issue.
(E) The first states a generalization that underlies the position opposed by the argument as a whole; the second clarifies the meaning of a specific phrase as it is used in that generalization.
__________________________
CR 2 A chemical factory periodically produces toxic phosphates as runoff, which it drains into a small river. This river carries the phosphates to a stretch of grassland, where they are absorbed by wild sunflowers. The phosphate accumulates in various parts of the plant, without harming the plant, and breaks down into non-toxic elements as the plant decays. However, when a certain species of hummingbird feeds off of the phosphate carrying flowers, it dies. Thus, the chemical factory is putting hummingbirds in the region at risk.
To assess the argument, which of the following would be most helpful?
A. Whether fish in the phosphate carrying river are likely to die from the phosphates’ effects
B. Whether the flower of the phosphate carrying sunflower is as toxic as other parts of the sunflower plant
C. Whether the chemical factory produces as much toxic runoff as other chemical factories do
D. Whether the hummingbirds are feeding off of sunflowers growing in the stretch of grassland downstream from the chemical factory
E. Whether any other birds compete with the hummingbirds to feed off of the sunflowers growing near the river
Apr 26
Apr 27
Apr 28
06 Feb 2026, 09:20 
