Step 1: Analyzing the flaw in the reasoning.
The author assumes a direct causal link between caffeine pill consumption and car accidents without considering other possible factors, like the proximity of the suppliers to accident-prone areas.
Step 2: Analysis of options.
- (A) The author does not assume that caffeine pills directly cause speeding, just that they correlate with higher efficiency.
- (B) This is the correct flaw, as the author doesn't account for other potential reasons for the high number of accidents near caffeine suppliers.
- (C) The argument does not suggest that higher efficiency makes truck drivers less likely to be involved in accidents; it just correlates caffeine consumption with accidents.
- (D) The argument doesn't claim that caffeine pills are the only cause of speeding.
- (E) While non-truck actions could be involved, the flaw is more about the proximity of caffeine suppliers, which is not addressed.
Step 3: Conclusion.
The correct answer is (B) because the author fails to consider other factors that could explain the proximity of caffeine suppliers to the accidents.
Critical Reasoning -- Assumption Argument:
"Flexible working hours will increase employee productivity because people perform best during the hours when they feel most energetic."
Which of the following is a necessary assumption?
Critical Reasoning -- Strengthen Argument:
"Cities with higher public-transport usage typically experience lower air pollution levels."
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
Argument:
"Introducing mandatory coding courses in schools will significantly improve students' problem-solving abilities."
Question:
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?