Drawing Deductive Conclusions Flashcards
6 cards from real Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 6 Drawing Deductive Conclusions flashcards as text
Read the following premises: All members of the finance committee are also on the advisory board. John is on the advisory board. Which of the following conclusions can be logically deduced?
Answer: No certain conclusion can be drawn about John's membership on the finance committee.
The premises state that being on the finance committee guarantees membership on the advisory board, but not the other way around. John's presence on the advisory board does not provide enough information to determine if he is on the finance committee. This is a common logical fallacy known as affirming the consequent.
Scenario: If a company invests in new technology, its productivity will increase. If productivity increases, profits will rise. The company has invested in new technology. Based only on these statements, which conclusion must be true?
Answer: The company's profits will rise.
This scenario follows a classic deductive structure called a syllogism (If A, then B; If B, then C; Given A, therefore C). Since the company invested in new technology (A), its productivity will increase (B), and because productivity will increase (B), its profits will rise (C). Therefore, the conclusion that profits will rise necessarily follows from the premises.
Which of the following is a defining characteristic of a deductively valid conclusion?
Answer: If the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true.
Deductive reasoning is defined by its logical structure, where the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. If an argument is deductively valid, it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false.
Premises: Some of the senior partners at the law firm are attending the conference. Everyone attending the conference will receive a new tablet. Based on these premises, which conclusion can be logically deduced?
Answer: Some of the senior partners at the law firm will receive a new tablet.
The first premise establishes that a portion of the 'senior partners' group is also in the 'attending the conference' group. The second premise states that everyone in the 'attending the conference' group will receive a tablet. Therefore, it logically follows that the overlapping portion of senior partners who are attending will receive a tablet.
Scenario: All certified accountants must pass a professional ethics exam. Maria is a certified accountant. What can be deduced from these statements?
Answer: Maria has passed the professional ethics exam.
This is a straightforward deductive argument. The first premise establishes a rule for all certified accountants. The second premise places Maria within that category. Therefore, the rule must apply to her, and the only logical conclusion is that she has passed the exam.
Premises: No vehicles that fail the emissions test are allowed on the road. Mr. Smith's car is allowed on the road. Which of the following is a valid deductive conclusion?
Answer: Mr. Smith's car passed the emissions test.
This is an example of modus tollens, a valid form of deductive argument. The first premise is 'If a vehicle failed the emissions test, then it is not allowed on the road.' The second premise is 'Mr. Smith's car is allowed on the road' (the negation of the consequent). Therefore, we can conclude the negation of the antecedent: 'Mr. Smith's car did not fail the emissions test,' which means it passed.