Sajjad1994 wrote:
When workers do not find their assignments challenging, they become bored and so achieve less than their abilities would allow. On the other hand, when workers find their assignments too difficult, they give up and so again achieve less than what they are capable of achieving. It is, therefore, clear that no workers' full potential will ever be realized.
Which one of the following is an error of reasoning contained in the argument?
(A) mistakenly equating what is actual and what is merely possible
(B) assuming without warrant that a situation allows only two possibilities
(C) relying on subjective rather than objective evidence
(D) confusing the coincidence of two events with a causal relation between the two
(E) depending on the ambiguous use of a key term
Source: Nova GMAT
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
(A) No. This argument commits the fallacy of false dichotomy. It assumes that workers have only two reactions to their work—either it’s not challenging or it’s too challenging. Clearly, there is a wide range of reactions between those two extremes.
(B) Yes. This argument commits the fallacy of false dichotomy. It assumes that workers have only two reactions to their work—either it’s not challenging or it’s too challenging. Clearly, there is a wide range of reactions between those two extremes.
(C) No. We cannot tell from the passage whether the evidence is subjective or objective.
(D) No. This argument commits the fallacy of false dichotomy. It assumes that workers have only two reactions to their work—either it’s not challenging or it’s too challenging. Clearly, there is a wide range of reactions between those two extremes.
(E) No. This argument commits the fallacy of false dichotomy. It assumes that workers have only two reactions to their work—either it’s not challenging or it’s too challenging. Clearly, there is a wide range of reactions between those two extremes.