If you study history, then you will appreciate the vast differences among past civilizations, and you will appreciate these differences provided that you reflect on your own civilization. Hence, if you study history you will reflect on your own civilization. Which one of the following is most closely parallel in its flawed reasoning to the flawed reasoning in the argument above? ['One can become informed about the world provided that one reads the newspaper daily. If one is informed about the world, then one has an appreciation of other cultures. So if one reads the newspaper daily, then one can come to appreciate other cultures.', 'If you learn Latin, you can improve your vocabulary, and you can improve your vocabulary if you study great works of literature. So you will study great works of literature if you learn Latin.', "Traveling to other countries deepens one's appreciation for their cultures, and this appreciation often encourages one to study the history of those lands. So the study of history increases one's desire to travel.", 'By studying ancient art you begin to appreciate how much was accomplished with limited materials. Appreciation of ancient art leads to a deeper understanding of modem art. Ttherefore, studying ancient art can engender a profound new appreciation for modem art.']