The author argues that the new musical genre copied elements of other genres and is therefore not original. This argument does not necessarily follow as there could be other elements of the genre that are original such as the use of new instruments and sounds or the amalgamation of different sounds to form a new coherent genre. Therefore, something can be true of a whole without it being true of its parts; thus the author makes the error described in the answer choice: “assuming that because something is true of each of the parts of a whole it is true of the whole itself.”

Doctor X only focuses on whether Mr. Jones can afford the procedure and does not discuss the medical merits of Doctor Y’s recommendation. Therefore, there is a scope shift. In other words, just because Mr. Jones cannot afford Doctor Y’s recommendation does not mean that his recommendation is suspect. This is reflected in the correct answer choice that states Doctor X’s flawed argument, “uses evidence concerning the economic feasibility of acting on a recommendation as a basis for questioning of the validity of the recommendation.”

The Mayor’s statement that the critics are “splitting hairs over semantics” indicates that he does not believe that the definition of the term "unhealthy foods" makes a difference to the argument. However, this is only his opinion. In actuality, a more restrictive, narrow definition of the term “unhealthy foods” may make significant difference to the critics of the bill. For example, a definition that excludes foods reputedly considered harmful to the public such as one that includes high fructose corn syrup or trans fat would not have the same impact as one that does; thus, support or criticism for the bill could turn on the definition of “unhealthy foods.” Therefore, the correct choice is: “It fails to adequately recognize the possibility that the definition of the term “unhealthy foods” determines the impact of the legislation.”

The author comes to the hasty conclusion that two armies that share the same size will share the same problem (here disease) associated with the density of their encampments. The author assumes that no other factor could influence the issue, which is not true; e.g. different sanitation procedures, more or better skilled medical personnel, etc. could also influence the incidence of disease. This failure to take into account other alternative explanations is the correct answer choice, “fails to take into account other factors that may have caused disease.”

Circular reasoning assumes the conclusion and is when the evidence and conclusion are functionally identical. Here, this is the case, and both the evidence and the conclusion are rewrites of each other. Thus, the correct answer choice is, “draws a conclusion that simply restates a claim given in support of that conclusion.”

The meteorologist did not establish a relationship between past temperatures and future temperatures.  As a result, the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the information given.  To remedy this flaw, the meteorologist would need to establish that past temperatures predict future temperatures.

The patient’s fundamental assumption is that Dr. Green’s diagnosis will be more accurate simply because he has more experience in evaluating patients. Yet there is no logical reason to assume this. The other doctor’s diagnosis may be accurate regardless of how many patients he has evaluated.

Nothing in the argument supports the conclusion that screenplay standards have dropped; all we know is that there are more special effects and computer graphics. Whether these entertain audiences more than the screenplay is beside the point. The movie critic does not address the possibility that modern films could still have well-written plots and dialogue regardless of their special effects.

The cookware is correlated to reduced overcooking. However, the chef thinks that the cookware will cause his food to no longer be overcooked, when the cause of such overcooking appears to be his inability to focus on a single dish because of his excessive multitasking. Therefore, the chef mistakes the cookware that he is using as being the cause of his food being overcooked. 

The correct answer identifies the cause/ correlation error that the chef has made. 

The argument provides no data indicating that sales of physical media are decreasing, nor does it explain any connection between increased digital media sales and physical media sales. Without additional information, one could assume that both types of media are increasing in sales. The incorrect answer choices do not attack the argument’s reasoning, but focus on other factors which do not necessarily affect the conclusion.