11{1[1(19)19]}> All sages provide both wisdom and inspiration. Since Dasha’s speech contained wisdom and greatly inspired her audience, Dasha is a sage.
Which one of the following points out the flaw in the argument above?
What following points?
People other than sages can provide wisdom and inspiration?
Is that close to one of the choices?
The argument above is an example of a logical fallacy known as affirming the consequent. It assumes that if a particular condition is met (Dasha's speech containing wisdom and inspiration), then the conclusion (Dasha being a sage) must also be true. However, this is not necessarily the case. There could be other factors that contribute to a person's ability to deliver a wise and inspiring speech, without them necessarily being a sage. To point out the flaw in the argument, we need to identify the statement that contradicts the reasoning. Let's analyze the answer choices:
A) "All sages who inspire are wise."
This answer choice does not directly challenge the argument. It does not counter the assumption that Dasha is a sage if her speech contains wisdom and inspiration.
B) "All sages are able to give speeches that inspire."
This statement may support the conclusion in the argument. It does not point out any flaw in the reasoning.
C) "All wise individuals provide inspiration."
This answer choice, like option A, does not contradict the argument. It does not challenge the idea that Dasha is a sage if her speech contains wisdom and inspiration.
D) "A person can provide inspiration without being a sage."
This statement is a direct contradiction to the argument. It presents an alternative possibility that the audience can be inspired by someone who is not a sage, thereby challenging the conclusion.
Therefore, the correct option that points out the flaw in the argument is D) "A person can provide inspiration without being a sage."