Interviewer: A certain company released a model of computer whose microprocessor design was flawed, making that computer liable to process information incorrectly. How did this happen?
Industry spokesperson: Given the huge number of circuits in the microprocessor of any modern computer, not every circuit can be manually checked before a computer model that contains the microprocessor is released.
Interviewer: Then what guarantee do we have that new microprocessors will not be similarly flawed?
Industry spokesperson: There is no chance of further microprocessor design flaws, since all microprocessors are now entirely computer- designed.
The industry spokesperson’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it
(A) presumes, without providing justification, that the microprocessor quality-control procedures of the company mentioned are not representative of those followed throughout the industry
(B) ignores the possibility that a microprocessor can have a flaw other than a design flaw
(C) overlooks the possibility that a new computer model is liable to malfunction for reasons other than a microprocessor flaw
(D) treats a single instance of a microprocessor design flaw as evidence that there will be many such flaws
(E) takes for granted, despite evidence to the contrary, that some computers are not liable to error
Industry spokesperson: Given the huge number of circuits in the microprocessor of any modern computer, not every circuit can be manually checked before a computer model that contains the microprocessor is released.
Interviewer: Then what guarantee do we have that new microprocessors will not be similarly flawed?
Industry spokesperson: There is no chance of further microprocessor design flaws, since all microprocessors are now entirely computer- designed.
The industry spokesperson’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it
(A) presumes, without providing justification, that the microprocessor quality-control procedures of the company mentioned are not representative of those followed throughout the industry
(B) ignores the possibility that a microprocessor can have a flaw other than a design flaw
(C) overlooks the possibility that a new computer model is liable to malfunction for reasons other than a microprocessor flaw
(D) treats a single instance of a microprocessor design flaw as evidence that there will be many such flaws
(E) takes for granted, despite evidence to the contrary, that some computers are not liable to error
Last edited by avenus on Thu May 28, 2009 4:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
: 
