Which reasoning flaw is demonstrated by the argument that the elimination of churches will reduce crime in New York?

Which reasoning flaw is demonstrated by the argument that the elimination of churches will reduce crime in New York?

• A. Faulty Analogy
• B. Concurrency
• C. Composition
• D. Division

Answer: (B)

The argument that the elimination of churches will reduce crime in New York demonstrates the flaw of concurrency. This reasoning flaw occurs when an argument incorrectly assumes that if two events or situations are correlated or happen to occur simultaneously, one must cause the other. In this case, the argument implies that because crime rates and churches might show some correlation, removing churches will have a direct and significant impact on reducing crime rates. However, this oversimplifies the complex nature of crime and its causes, disregarding other factors—social, economic, and community-related—that contribute to crime levels. Hence, the reasoning fails because it does not provide a valid causal relationship and instead relies on a questionable assumption about the correlation between church presence and crime rates.

The argument that the elimination of churches will reduce crime in New York demonstrates the flaw of concurrency. This reasoning flaw occurs when an argument incorrectly assumes that if two events or situations are correlated or happen to occur simultaneously, one must cause the other.

In this case, the argument implies that because crime rates and churches might show some correlation, removing churches will have a direct and significant impact on reducing crime rates. However, this oversimplifies the complex nature of crime and its causes, disregarding other factors—social, economic, and community-related—that contribute to crime levels. Hence, the reasoning fails because it does not provide a valid causal relationship and instead relies on a questionable assumption about the correlation between church presence and crime rates.