Hovkial
To date, most of the proposals that have been endorsed by the Citizens League have been passed by the city council. Thus, any future proposal that is endorsed by the Citizens League will probably be passed as well.
The pattern of reasoning in which one of the following arguments is most similar to that in the argument above?
(A) Most of the Vasani grants that have been awarded in previous years have gone to academic biologists. Thus, if most of the Vasani grants awarded next year are awarded to academics, most of these will probably be biologists.
(B) Most of the individual trees growing on the coastal islands in this area are deciduous. Therefore, most of the tree species on these islands are probably deciduous varieties.
(C) Most of the editors who have worked for the local newspaper have not been sympathetic to local farmers. Thus, if the newspaper hires someone who is sympathetic to local farmers, they will probably not be hired as an editor.
(D) Most of the entries that were received after the deadline for last year’s photography contest were rejected by the judges’ committee. Thus, the people whose entries were received after the deadline last year will probably send them in well before the deadline this year.
(E) Most of the stone artifacts that have been found at the archaeological site have been domestic tools. Thus, if the next artifact found at the site is made of stone, it will probably be a domestic tool.
EXPLANATION:
Answer: (E) The argument concludes that since
most proposals endorsed by the Citizens League in the past have been
passed by the city council,
future proposals endorsed by the League will
probably also be passed.
It uses
inductive reasoning, drawing a prediction about future cases based on a consistent pattern observed in past cases of the same kind.
(A) Most Vasani grants in past years went to academic biologists. Hmm This one can option can be a bit tricky. But the conclusion adds a new condition (“if most are awarded to academics next year”) before predicting the outcome. This introduces an extra factor instead of directly applying the past trend to a future case of the same kind.
Hence Rejected.(B) Moves from individual trees (specific instances) to tree species (categories). The conclusion changes the subject level, inferring about types rather than individual cases. The reasoning structure is different from the stimulus, which keeps the same kind of subject (proposals → proposals).
Rejected.(C) Says most editors have not been sympathetic to farmers, then concludes that if someone sympathetic is hired, they probably won’t be hired as an editor. This flips the relationship and makes a prediction opposite in direction, unlike the original argument which extends the same pattern forward.
Rejected. (D) Notes that most late entries were rejected, then concludes that people who were late last year will send entries earlier this year. This assumes a behavioural change, not continuation of the same pattern. The reasoning is causal and behavioral, not predictive based on repetition.
Rejected. (E) States that most stone artifacts found so far have been domestic tools, then concludes that if the next artifact found is made of stone, it will probably be a domestic tool. Eureka !! This directly mirrors the structure of the original argument — reasoning from the frequency of a past pattern to a probable future occurrence of the same type.
Hence We Mark it as Correct.