Historians and trends

I will go with C.

nope

Really, really hard one. Not even 50% sure of my answer, but here goes: there's this trait that links two things together, in this case spotting a trend. I goes like so:

historians --- spot a trend --- distinguish between significant and insignificant


I think the closest to this reasoning is D:

blues musicians --- desire to communicate --- short story writers

DanaJ wrote:Really, really hard one. Not even 50% sure of my answer, but here goes: there's this trait that links two things together, in this case spotting a trend. I goes like so:

historians --- spot a trend --- distinguish between significant and insignificant


I think the closest to this reasoning is D:

blues musicians --- desire to communicate --- short story writers

nope... it's getting easier

OMG it's still hard as hell. Can't wait for a good explanation... I spent like 10 mins on it, missed Bear Grylls and still didn't get it!

A IMO

riteshbindal wrote:A IMO

aha... maybe you'd care to provide an explanation...

what/who's Bear grylls by the way??

IMO A

All Historians are able to spot trends
Anyone able to spot trends is able to distinguish the significant from insignificant
Hence the conclusion should be:
All historians are able to distinguish significant from insignificant
All X are able to Y

However the given conclusion is:
Anyone who can distinguish the significant from insignificant is a historian
Anyone who is able to Y is X

This is a circular reasoning flaw.

Consider option A:
All expressions used for emotional impact are expressions used by poet
All figures of speech are expressions used for emotional impact

Hence conclusion should be
All figures of speech are expressions used by poet
All X are Y

But the given conclusion is
Any expression used by poets is a figure of speech
All Y are X

This is a circular reasoning flaw

sanju438 wrote:IMO A

All Historians are able to spot trends
Anyone able to spot trends is able to distinguish the significant from insignificant
Hence the conclusion should be:
All historians are able to distinguish significant from insignificant
All X are able to Y

However the given conclusion is:
Anyone who can distinguish the significant from insignificant is a historian
Anyone who is able to Y is X

This is a circular reasoning flaw.

Consider option A:
All expressions used for emotional impact are expressions used by poet
All figures of speech are expressions used for emotional impact

Hence conclusion should be
All figures of speech are expressions used by poet
All X are Y

But the given conclusion is
Any expression used by poets is a figure of speech
All Y are X

This is a circular reasoning flaw

spot-on
OA A

Guys can anyone give a decent reason why A is not right.