The university claims that to close its budget gap, it must either raise tuition or reduce faculty salaries. Reducing salaries is impossible, because the best professors would leave. Consequently, the university has no choice but to raise tuition. Moreover, alternatives like cutting administrative costs have already been 'considered,' though no details were provided. Thus, anyone who opposes a tuition increase is effectively advocating for worse teaching.
The reasoning in the argument is best described as which of the following?
- Inferring that a condition is necessary merely because it is sufficient
- Presenting only two options as exhaustive, eliminating one, and concluding the other must be adopted (correct answer)
- Citing a biased study as definitive proof of a controversial claim
- Appealing to tradition to justify continuing a problematic practice
- Using an anecdote to establish a general rule
Explanation: It falsely limits the options to two, dismisses one, and concludes the other is required. The other strategies (necessary/sufficient confusion, biased study, tradition, anecdotal generalization) are not employed.