Logical Reasoning Sample Question:

Everyone who is compassionate is kind, and someone who has experienced lifes
challenges is invariably compassionate. Jeremy is kind, so he has experienced
lifes challenges.
Which one of the following exhibits a pattern of flawed reasoning most similar to
that exhibited above?
(A) Roberta is a highly productive person. Every person who is motivated is
highly productive, and every person who is organized is motivated. Therefore,
Roberta is very organized.
(B) Nice people are always sympathetic people, and those who have experienced
hardships always end up being nice. Betsy is not a sympathetic person, so Betsy
has not experienced hardships.
(C) Almost everyone who loves black and white films is a movie buff, and all
movie buffs enjoy popcorn. Sasha does not love black and white films, so Sasha
probably does not enjoy popcorn.
(D) Patience requires an even temperament, and being a good parent certainly
requires patience. James has no patience, so James is not a good parent.
(E) Successful entrepreneurs are either confident or experienced. Yoshi is a
successful entrepreneur, and he is not experienced. Therefore, Yoshi is confident.

Solution:
The given argument contains two conditional statements:
1. Everyone who is compassionate is kind. (C K)
2. Someone who has experienced lifes challenges is invariably compassionate.
(E C)
We can connect these conditionals: E C K
From this chain we can see that someone who has experienced lifes challenges
is kind: E K
Notice that the conclusion of the argument is the reverse of this. If Jeremy is kind,
then he has experienced lifes challenges: K E
This is an invalid reversal of the logic. To get a sense of what that means,
consider this:

If we know that If Tony wins the prize, hell be happy (P H), can we infer that if
Tony is happy, it means he won the prize (H P)? It may be tempting to say yes,
but we cannot infer that (we cant say it for sure) because perhaps Tony is happy
for a different reason (he got engaged, he got a raise at work, etc.).
In selecting our answer, we want to look for a choice that makes the same invalid
reversal.
Answer (A): CORRECT
Every person who is motivated is highly productive. (M HP)
Every person who is organized is motivated. (O M)
These connect to give: O M HP
So we know: O HP
The argument uses reversed logic to make a conclusion about Roberta. Because
she is highly productive, she is organized: HP O
This is the same flaw that appeared in the original argument, so this is the
correct answer. This answer is a bit tricky because the argument is in a different
order. However, were tasked with finding an argument with the same
flawed logic. The order is irrelevant.
Answer (B):
Nice people are always sympathetic people. (N S)
Those who have experienced hardships always end up being nice. (EH N)
These connect to give: EH N S
So we know: EH S
The argument uses a correct contrapositive to makes its conclusion about Betsy.
Betsy is not sympathetic, so Betsy has not experienced hardships: -S -EH
This argument has no flaw.
Answer (C):
We can tell immediately that this argument does not contain the same
conditional logic flaw as the original because two out of three statements in this
argument arent even conditional statements: almost everyone who loves black
and white films, and Sasha probably does not enjoy popcorn.
Answer (D):

Patience requires an even temperament. (P ET)

Being a good parent certainly requires patience. (BGP P)
These connect to give: BGP P ET
The argument uses a correct contrapositive to make its conclusion about James.
James has no patience, so James is not a good parent: -P -BGP
This argument has no flaw.
Answer (E):
This argument is based on either/or logic, which is different from the logic used in
the original argument. Furthermore, this argument is not flawed. If Yoshi is not
experienced he must be confident.