Loading...
Banker: My country's laws require every bank to invest in its local community by lending money to local businesses, providing mortgages for local home purchases, and so forth. This is intended to revitalize impoverished local communities. But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose. An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community.
The banker's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| My country's laws require every bank to invest in its local community by lending money to local businesses, providing mortgages for local home purchases, and so forth. |
|
| This is intended to revitalize impoverished local communities. |
|
| But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose. |
|
| An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community. |
|
"The banker starts by explaining the current law requiring community investment, then states its purpose of helping poor communities. Next, he makes a bold prediction that this law will completely fail, and finally provides evidence about the rise of online-only banks to support this prediction."
"The law requiring banks to invest in local communities will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose of revitalizing impoverished areas."
"The argument assumes that because online banks have no physical location, they cannot or will not be able to invest in any local community. The evidence (online banks increasing) is supposed to prove the conclusion (law will fail completely)."
Misc. (Flaw/Vulnerability) - This is asking us to identify what makes the banker's argument weak or flawed
The banker makes an absolute claim that the law will 'entirely cease to serve its intended purpose' and uses the qualifier 'clear' to suggest certainty
For flaw questions, we need to identify gaps in the banker's reasoning. The banker assumes that online banks can't invest in local communities just because they lack physical locations. We should look for ways this assumption could be wrong or how the argument jumps to conclusions without considering alternatives
Choice A: This choice suggests the argument overlooks that most physical banks aren't in impoverished communities. However, this misses the point of the argument. The banker isn't concerned about where existing banks are located, but rather about the trend toward online-only banks that have no physical community presence at all. Whether current banks are in poor or wealthy areas doesn't address the core issue the banker raises about online banks.
Choice B: This choice says the argument assumes a law that stops serving its original purpose can't serve any other beneficial purpose. While this might be a minor flaw, it's not the main vulnerability. The banker's focus is specifically on whether the law will serve its intended purpose of community revitalization, not whether it might have other benefits. This doesn't capture the core logical gap in the reasoning.
Choice C: This choice describes confusing a condition likely to produce an effect with a condition that would probably cause that effect if present. This is about mixing up correlation and causation in a specific way, but the banker's argument isn't really making this type of logical error. The banker is making a prediction based on a trend, not confusing different types of causal relationships.
Choice D: This choice points to overlooking that correlation doesn't imply causation between two phenomena. Again, this isn't the main issue here. The banker isn't claiming that two correlated phenomena cause each other; rather, he's arguing that one trend (more online banks) will lead to a specific outcome (law becoming ineffective).
Choice E: This correctly identifies the flaw. The banker assumes that an increase in online banks will lead to the complete elimination of traditional banks with physical locations. The argument jumps from 'increasing number of online banks' to 'the law will entirely cease to serve its purpose' without considering that both types of banks can coexist. Traditional banks with physical locations could continue operating and fulfilling the law's requirements even as online banks become more numerous. The word 'entirely' in the conclusion makes this oversight particularly significant.