mkrishnabdrr
Tall children can generally reach high shelves easily. Short children can generally reach high shelves only with difficulty. It is known that short children are more likely than are tall children to become short adults. Therefore, if short children are taught to reach high shelves easily, the proportion of them who become short adults will decrease.
A reasoning error in the argument is that the argument
(A) attributes a characteristic of an individual member of a group to the group as a whole
(B) presupposes that which is to be proved
(C) refutes a generalization by means of an exceptional case
(D) assumes a causal relationship where only a correlation has been indicated
(E) takes lack of evidence for the existence of a state of affairs as evidence that there can be no such state of affairs
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
(A) No. An individual is not mentioned.
(B) No. The conclusion (that which is to be proved) is mentioned only once—at the end of the passage.
(C) No. While several generalizations are made (e.g., “
Tall children can generally reach high shelves easily.”), no specific cases are mentioned that refute these principles.
(D) Yes. This is a false causal argument. It falsely assumes that the difficulty short children have in reaching high shelves is what stunts their growth.
(E) No. The argument errs in falsely establishing a causal relationship between two items—difficulty reaching shelves as a child and short height as an adult—that are actually both effects of a third, independent cause. True, no specific evidence is given, but its lack is not used as a basis for any conclusion.