Journalist: A manufacturers’ trade group that has long kept its membership list secret inadvertently sent me a document listing hundreds of manufacturing companies. A representative of the trade group later confirmed that every company listed in the document does indeed belong to the trade group. Because Bruch Industries is not listed on the document, it is evidently not a member of the trade group.
The journalist’s reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the journalist
(A) gives no reason to think that Bruch Industries would want to belong to the trade group- irrelevant; the motivations of group members is not relevant
(B) does not present any evidence that the document names every member of the trade group- Correct; The representative stated that every company on the list is a member of the group, but not that the list was a complete list of every member of the organization.
(C) does not explain how it is that the trade group could have inadvertently sent out a secret document- Irrelevant
(D)presents no reason why Bruch Industries would not want its membership in the trade group to be known - Irrelevant; The argument is entirely focused on the composition of the trade organization. The motivations a company would have for joining, or for hiding its membership, is not relevant to the argument in the stimulus which attempts to derive knowledge of the trade organization based on a list of known members.
(E)takes for granted the accuracy of a statement by a representative who had a reason to withhold information- Incorrect; There was no indication in the stimulus that the trade organization was known for lying; just that they were known for withholding information. The journalist does not err by drawing a conclusion based on information partially drawn from the representative’s statements.
Answer B