Cause Versus Temporal Sequence – UGC NET Question

Logical reasoning requires distinguishing mere sequence from genuine causal connection. Just because the street was wet after the parade does not mean the parade caused the wetness; it could have rained or a water tanker might have washed the road. The argument commits a post hoc type error by inferring causation solely from “after.” The appropriate criticism is that it overlooks alternative explanations and treats temporal order as sufficient evidence of cause.

Option A:
Option A assumes that any earlier event causes any later event, which is an obvious exaggeration and not a careful logical assessment.

Option B:
Option B correctly identifies the confusion between “after” and “because of,” and points out the neglect of other plausible causes for the wet street.

Option C:
Option C wrongly claims that the argument is valid because wet streets always follow parades, a premise that is neither stated nor universally true.

Option D:
Option D mistakes factual reference to events for soundness; soundness also requires a valid inference from true premises, which is missing here.