Bunuel
The last outdoor drive-in movie theater in Nova Scotia closed recently. The owners claimed that it could not regularly attract large enough audiences to remain viable. However, for an entire week—the final week of the theater’s operation, after the announcement of the impending closure—the place was sold out every night and made a healthy profit. Therefore, the owners’ claim was clearly false.
Which one of the following contains an error of reasoning most similar to that made in the argument above?
(A) On the many occasions similar to the present when the library’s budget was cut, staff layoffs resulted, so even though the administration denies it, the proposed budget cuts are bound to mean staff layoffs.
(B) The proposed cuts in library funding would require reducing the hours of the periodicals room. But that is a room in which many students like to study, so the proposed cuts are bound to stir up considerable opposition.
(C) All of the students who came to the meeting about proposed cuts in library funding were strongly opposed to the cuts, so all of the students currently enrolled must be strongly opposed.
(D) The overall reduction in the university’s budget is 10 percent. The library’s budget is being cut by 10 percent. Therefore the library’s budget cut is fair.
(E) The administration claims that the library’s funding must be cut because of last year’s poor library fund drive. However the athletic department’s budget is being increased. Therefore, the administration’s claim must be false.
The fallacy present in the argument is a case of generalizaton.
Conclusion of Author: The owner’s claim is false.
Owner’s claim: The theater couldn’t attract enough audience to remain viable.
Fallacy in author’s reasoning: Considered his observation of one week to be true for all the past times.
Sample size of observation of author is small, but the conclusion made is for a large sample size.
Only options A and C have the same the types of fallacy as of author’s.
A- Here the conclusion is made for one event on the basis of events, which has large sample size, which could be inferred from “On the many occasions”.
However, author made the observation for a large sample size, i.e. for all
the past, from one event, i.e. from one week’s observation.
C- This option has fallacy pretty close to the that present in the argument in that it also conclude for a large sample size, i.e. “all the students enrolled”, from a small sample size, i.e. “all the students who came to the meeting”.
Hence C is the best option.
In B, D, and E the conclusion is drawn from two mutually exclusive events.
Posted from my mobile device