#17 - Office manager: I will not order recycled paper for

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Flaw in the reasoning. The correct answer choice is (B)

The manager wants to make a good impression for his clients, so he declares that he will not use recycled paper, which is inferior. The stationer retorts that recycled paper is not necessarily inferior. To support his assertion, he cites historical evidence from hundreds of years ago that the finest paper has been made from recycled material. Clearly, the stationer's response is flawed because we (as well as the manager) do not care about the merits of recycled paper historically. We care about the quality of recycled paper today. As such, the stationer cites irrelevant evidence to back up his claim.

Answer choice (A) Actually, the stationer's response seems to suggest that the manager's prejudice against recycled paper does stem from ignorance. By telling him about the historical quality of recycled paper, the stationer assumes that the manager is ignorant about this aspect of recycled paper.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. As noted above, the stationer cites irrelevant evidence about the historical quality of recycled paper to justify a claim about quality of recycled paper today.

Answer choice (C) There is no indication that the stimulus even mentions environmental issues, and thus it plays no part in the stationer's response.

Answer choice (D) response makes no such presupposition. The argument here does not rely on any presupposition about the manager's knowledge.

Answer choice (E) Actually, the stationer's response explicitly tries to address the office manger's concern about quality. In fact, this is the very purpose of the stationer's response.

[reop6780]

I got the correct answer of B, but I do not understand B yet ( I just simply excluded other answers).

How does answer B present "irrelevant facts"?

Generally, I'm confused of the term used, "irrelevant facts."

what makes them irrelevant?

Office manager claimed that recycled paper is inferior, and stationery supplier came up with the argument that recycled paper is not inferior based upon its history.

What would make facts suggested by stationery supplier "relevant"?

I was originally looking for an answer that has "error in time shift" in that supplier's response replies on the past of recycled paper.

Thank you

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Hyun,

The stationary supplier is saying that before the 1850s, the best paper was recycled. Our office manager is concerned about having the best paper today. Therefore, information about what was the best paper pre-1850 is irrelevant because it has nothing to do with what is the best paper today.

You were on the right track in thinking about a time-shift error--the supplier is giving us facts about the distant past to respond to a concern about the present. But, in this case, the time-shift error is so severe that it makes the facts the stationary supplier gives us irrelevant.

Hope that helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[reop6780]

Thanks, it did help me!

[niki]

Hi,

I selected B, but I have a question about E.

One of the reasons I was considering E was because I assumed that the manager's "legitimate concern about quality" was to leave a good impression on clients. A concern that the stationary supplier completely ignores.

[Alexandra Ruby]

Hi niki,

Great question! I think that E would be closer to being correct without the word "legitimate." We do not have enough information from the stimulus to conclude that the Office Manager's concern with the paper quality is legitimate. Moreover, the stationary supplier does respond to the concern by stating that recycled paper is not necessarily inferior although the supplier uses irrelevant data in responding.

Hope this helps!

[niki]

thank you! this helps a lot

[andriana.caban]

As noted above, the stationer cites irrelevant evidence about the historical quality of recycled paper to justify a claim about quality of recycled paper today.

What does justify a claim mean in this context?

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Andriana,

That phrase simply means to "prove a point." In our case, then, the supplier uses irrelevant information to prove a point—that doesn't mean the point is successfully proven, just that using those facts is how they are trying to do it

Thanks!