tough one expl pls

This is not a difficult one, if you can use mathematical approach to critical reasoning.

First lets diagramatize the stimulus [Note: Maths is amazing. you can simplify a lot of CR questions just by applying maths to them]

Stimulus- after all the crap they say in words, what they actually want to convey is this:

government does not support -> (read the arrow as implies) government does not allow creating the art.

ie. A -> B

the second sentence means: create art -> government support.

B-> A

so u see the reasoning: A -> B
B -> A [ this is a flawed reasoning. this flaw is called mistaken reversal error. we need to find yet another mistaken reversal error in the options]

this is the reasoning you need to find out in the answer choices.

a)The claim that any driver who is not arrested does not break the law is absurd, as one can see by rewording it: Every driver who breaks the law gets arrested.
driver not arrested -> not break the law [ A -> B]
breaks law -> driver arrested [B negation -> A negation] - there is no flaw in this option. we need a flawed reasoning as our answer. Eliminated!

b)The claim that any driver who is not arrested doesnot break the law is absurd, as one can see by rewording it: Every driver who gets arrested has broken the law
driver not arrested -> not break the law [ A -> B]
driver arrested -> breaks the law [A negation -> B negation] - mistaken negation error. Eliminated!


c)The notion that every scientist who is supported by a government grant will be successful is absurd, as one can see by rewording it :No scientist who is successful is so without a government grant.
scientist supported by govt grant -> successful [A -> B]
scientist successful -> government grant [B -> A] - Bingo! here is the reversal flaw. My answer.

d)The notion that every scientist who is supported by a government grant will be successful is absurd, as one can see by rewording it :No scientist lacking governmental support will be successful.
scientist supported by govt grant -> successful [A -> B]
scientist lacks govt support -> successful [A negation -> B] this is utter crap. i dont even have a name for the error. It is a medley pf all errors.

e)The notion that every scientist who has been supported by a government grant will be successful is absurd, as one can see by rewording it : No scientist is allowed to do research without a government grant.
scientist supported by govt grant -> successful [A -> B]
scientist allowed to do research -> government grant. now where does research come from? do we mean research is equivalent to successful? ask any scientist and he will tell you how not true this is [PS: my project stands testimony!!]
Anyways, without digressing, research is a new word and it cannot replace successful at all.

Hope this helps!

Thanks but the OA IS A. Can anyone confirm?