Civil Service Verbal Reasoning Test Argument Analysis 1 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Argument: 'We should ban smartphones in schools because studies show students who use phones in class get lower grades.' Which statement BEST identifies a flaw in this argument?
- The argument confuses correlation with causation — lower grades could cause more phone use, not the other way round (Correct answer)
- Smartphones are useful learning tools
- Banning items in school is difficult to enforce
- Studies are not always reliable
Correct answer: The argument confuses correlation with causation — lower grades could cause more phone use, not the other way round
The argument assumes phone use causes lower grades, but the relationship could be reversed — students struggling academically may turn to phones more often.
Question 2: Argument: 'Vegetarians are healthier than meat-eaters, so everyone should become vegetarian.' Which is the main weakness of this argument?
- The conclusion does not follow — health difference alone does not mean everyone should change their diet (Correct answer)
- Vegetarianism is impractical for many people
- Meat contains essential nutrients
- Not all vegetarians are healthy
Correct answer: The conclusion does not follow — health difference alone does not mean everyone should change their diet
Even if vegetarians are on average healthier, this does not logically compel everyone to become vegetarian. The argument leaps from a statistical observation to a prescriptive conclusion.
Question 3: An argument states: 'Our competitors have cut their prices. Therefore, we should too.' What BEST describes a flaw in this reasoning?
- The argument assumes what works for competitors will work for this company without considering differences in costs or strategy (Correct answer)
- Price cutting is always risky
- Competitors may be wrong
- The market is unpredictable
Correct answer: The argument assumes what works for competitors will work for this company without considering differences in costs or strategy
What works for competitors may not suit this company — they may have different cost structures, margins, or market positioning. The argument ignores these differences.
Question 4: Argument: 'This politician was found to have lied about their expenses. Therefore, nothing they say on any subject can be trusted.' What logical flaw does this commit?
- Ad hominem — attacking the person rather than evaluating their arguments on their merits (Correct answer)
- Straw man — misrepresenting the politician's position
- False dichotomy — presenting only two options
- Circular reasoning — using the conclusion as the premise
Correct answer: Ad hominem — attacking the person rather than evaluating their arguments on their merits
The argument dismisses all of the politician's statements based on a personal failing rather than evaluating each argument on its own merits. This is the ad hominem fallacy.
Question 5: Argument: 'Most people support the new policy in our survey. Therefore it is a good policy.' What is the main weakness?
- Popular support does not make a policy good — it may still have harmful consequences (Correct answer)
- Surveys are unreliable
- Most people are uninformed
- Support may change over time
Correct answer: Popular support does not make a policy good — it may still have harmful consequences
Majority opinion does not determine the quality or correctness of a policy. Something can be popular yet harmful or unjust.
Question 6: A company argues: 'We have been making this product for 100 years. Therefore our product is the best on the market.' What fallacy does this commit?
- Appeal to tradition — assuming that age or longevity guarantees quality (Correct answer)
- Appeal to authority
- False dichotomy
- Hasty generalisation
Correct answer: Appeal to tradition — assuming that age or longevity guarantees quality
The argument assumes that because something has been done for a long time, it must be the best option. This is the appeal to tradition fallacy — longevity does not equal quality.
