The student body at this university takes courses in a wide range of

Question

The student body at this university takes courses in a wide range of disciplines. Miriam is a student at this university, so she takes courses in a wide range of disciplines.

Which one of the following arguments exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to that exhibited by the argument above?

(A) The students at this school take mathematics. Miguel is a student at this school, so he takes mathematics.

(B) The editorial board of this law journal has written on many legal issues. Louise is on the editorial board, so she has written on many legal issues.

(C) The component parts of bulldozers are heavy. This machine is a bulldozer, so it is heavy.

(D) All older automobiles need frequent oil changes. This car is new, so its oil need not be changed as frequently.

(E) The individual cells of the brain are incapable of thinking. Therefore, the brain as a whole is incapable of thinking.

AkshayKS21 · Answer

Argument confuses us between student body and "all" students. Student body is necessarily a fraction of student population. Miriam need not be part of student body to take courses in wide range of disciplines.

(A) The students at this school take mathematics. Miguel is a student at this school, so he takes mathematics.
This is good argument and leaves no space to weaken. No flaw in this answer.
(B) The editorial board of this law journal has written on many legal issues. Louise is on the editorial board, so she has written on many legal issues.
This makes the same error. But i still think the answer is incorrectly worded. Shouldn't Loise be just the editor and not on the editorial board to make this answer's reasoning similar to that of question stem?
Still this is the best choice we have got here.
(C) The component parts of bulldozers are heavy. This machine is a bulldozer, so it is heavy.
This is flawed, but not in the same way. This takes the fraction first and links it to the whole part.
(D) All older automobiles need frequent oil changes. This car is new, so its oil need not be changed as frequently.
This is utter nonsense. There's no talk of fractional and whole parts of the same population.
(E) The individual cells of the brain are incapable of thinking. Therefore, the brain as a whole is incapable of thinking.
This one commits same mistake as C.

Given no other choice, B is the answer.
I didn't like this question. What is the source?
This is definitely a sub-550 level question!

SarahPurewal · Answer

This looks...like an LSAT question. It's definitely not a GMAT question.

sananoor · Answer

Sarah actually i am trying to practice hard CR questions and i think LSAT is the best source but yet i am not improving. Any tip? seriously CR is giving me hard time

Masterscorp · Answer

The student body at this university takes courses in a wide range of disciplines. Miriam is a student at this university, so she takes courses in a wide range of disciplines.

Which one of the following arguments exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to that exhibited by the argument above?
(A) The students at this school take mathematics. Miguel is a student at this school, so he takes mathematics.
(B) The editorial board of this law journal has written on many legal issues. Louise is on the editorial board, so she has written on many legal issues.
(C) The component parts of bulldozers are heavy. This machine is a bulldozer, so it is heavy.
(D) All older automobiles need frequent oil changes. This car is new, so its oil need not be changed as frequently.
(E) The individual cells of the brain are incapable of thinking. Therefore, the brain as a whole is incapable of thinking.

The only two choices, that look viable at the first look are A) and B).

A) just focusses on one subject/topic, which is "maths". In contrast, B) talks about multiple subjects/topics in form of "many legal issues".
The original reasoning also uses multiple subjects/topics, namely "a wide range of disciplines". 
Thus answer choice B) seems to be the best fit.

sfoo · Answer

I don't feel like the previous answers really address the argument correctly. Here is how I see the problem:

The student body at this university takes courses in a wide range of disciplines. Miriam is a student at this university, so she takes courses in a wide range of disciplines.

This argument is saying that because something is true for the collective, it must also be true for the individual. This reasoning is flawed because part of what may allow the variety in the collective is the number of people contributing to the collective. For example, if the student body was made up 1000 different students and each student only took courses in one discipline but no two students took classes in the same discipline, it would still be true that the student body TOGETHER takes classes in many different disciplines. We are looking for an argument that extrapolates variety in the collective to variety in the individual.

Which one of the following arguments exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to that exhibited by the argument above?
(A) The students at this school take mathematics. Miguel is a student at this school, so he takes mathematics.
This answer is temptingly close, but does not quite fit the mold. It is assuming what is true for the collective is true for the individual, but the assumption is not one that assumes variety. Furthermore, I actually think that "the students at this school take mathematics" could be reasonably read to be synonymous to "every student at this school takes mathematics", which would eliminate the logical fallacy. Still, if there is no better answer, this could be the right answer.

(B) The editorial board of this law journal has written on many legal issues. Louise is on the editorial board, so she has written on many legal issues.
This answer perfectly demonstrates the fallacy. It assumes that because the collective (the editorial board) has variety (written on many legal issues), that an individual member (Louise) also has variety of experience. However, it could be true that each member of the editorial board is a specialist in one legal issue and has only written on that issue, and because of this collectively the board has written on many issues. This problem is the same problem as that of the school body. This is the right answer.

(C) The component parts of bulldozers are heavy. This machine is a bulldozer, so it is heavy.
(D) All older automobiles need frequent oil changes. This car is new, so its oil need not be changed as frequently.
(E) The individual cells of the brain are incapable of thinking. Therefore, the brain as a whole is incapable of thinking.

srikalivarapu · Answer

Argument —> if you are at the university you are expected to take ur courses not everything that is offered. The principal could say we offer a wide range of courses doesn’t mean u join the university and you will do the entire course work they offer.

Find an answer that fits this—B fits the bill

You are part of a board and don’t do stuff the entire board does ..you do your stuff that you specialize in

Posted from my mobile device

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

The student body at this university takes courses in a wide range of

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The student body at this university takes courses in a wide range of

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards