Question

Vijay claimed that the large dent in the fender of the company-owned vehicle he had borrowed was caused by the careless act of another motorist, who backed into the car when it was parked in a public garage. Yet Vijay's own car has several dents in its fenders, all of which he acknowledges as having , caused by his own careless driving. Therefore, Vijay's contention that the dent in the formerly untended company-owned vehicle was caused by the careless act of another person is not true?
The reasoning in this argument is vulnerable because it __________________.

• A. Fails to recognize that Vijay could be lying about the dents in his own vehicle
• B. Fails to recognize that the motorist who backed into him simply did not see him
• C. Fails to acknowledge that many such accident occur in parking garages
• D. Presumes, without justification, that because Vijay has caused similar dents to his own car, he caused the dent in the company car.

Answer 1

The correct option is D Presumes, without justification, that because Vijay has caused similar dents to his own car, he caused the dent in the company car.

Even though Vijay has acknowledged causing dents on his own car due to his own recklessness, that does not necessarily mean he handled the office car with the same laxity. This makes the argument vulnerable and therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.