Step 1: Analyzing the flaw in the argument.
The Great Fakir criticizes the Magnificent Mystic's act as a form of "mechanical trickery," but his own act also uses mechanical devices to create illusions. The flaw in his reasoning is that he dismisses the Mystic's act without acknowledging that his own act relies on similar techniques.
Step 2: Analysis of options.
- (A) The criticism is about the technique used in the act (mechanical trickery), not the morality.
- (B) While popularity is mentioned, the core issue is the inconsistency in criticizing the Mystic's act while using similar methods.
- (C) There is no attack on the credentials of the Great Fakir; the criticism is on the technique of the Mystic's act.
- (D) The argument does not focus on differentiating types of mechanical trickery; it's about the inconsistency in their methods.
- (E) The main flaw is that the Great Fakir suggests there is a difference between his act and the Mystic's act when they both rely on similar mechanical devices.
Step 3: Conclusion.
The correct answer is (E) because the Great Fakir's criticism overlooks the fact that his own act uses similar techniques.
Historian: The Russian Revolution in the early 20th century was sparked not by the proletariat, but by the bourgeoisie, or intellectual middle-class, a fact that is widely accepted in modern academia. The French Revolution of 1789 was also largely ignited by a rising middle class. The idea that political upheavals are initiated by the populist "peasant-class" is widely accepted as a fallacy today. Therefore, political commentators analyzing the "Arab Spring" movement in the past two years are inaccurate in suggesting that the movement is truly populist.
Which of the following best describes the flaw in the historian's argument?
If \(8x + 5x + 2x + 4x = 114\), then, \(5x + 3 = ?\)
If \(r = 5 z\) then \(15 z = 3 y,\) then \(r =\)