Support There are rumors that the Premier will reshuffle the cabinet this week. ββββββββ βββββ ββββββββ βββββββββ ββββ βββ βββββββ βββ ββββ βββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββββ βββββββ βββ βββββββ βββ ββββββ βββββββ ββββββββ ββ ββββ ββββββββ ββββ ββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββ βββββββββ βββ ββββββ βββ ββββ ββββββ ββββββ
The author concludes that the rumors about the premier planning to reshuffle his cabinet are likely false. The reasoning is that in prior instances where it happened, such a move was always preceded by a meeting between the premier and cabinet members, and this time, no meetings have occurred.
Since previous reshuffles were preceded by a meeting, we would expect, based on previous experience, that another reshuffle would also be preceded by a meeting. This is the evidence the author uses to conclude the rumor is likely false. But fundamentally, this is an argument about the present, based on the past. Thus, it relies on the principle that we can apply expectations based on past experiences to the present.
Which one of the following ββββ ββββββββββ βββββββββ β βββββββββ ββ βββββββββ ββββββββ ββ βββ βββββββββ
When a conclusion βββββββ βββββββββ ββββ β βββ ββ βββββββββ βββ βββββββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββββ ββ ββββ ββββββ ββ βββ ββββ ββββ βββ βββββββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββ βββ βββ βββββ
A hypothesis is ββββββββββ ββββ β βββββ ββ βββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββ ββββ βββββ ββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββββ ββββ βββββ
It is possible βββ β ββββββββββ ββ ββ βββββ ββββ ββββββ ββ ββ βββββββββ ββ βββ βββ βββββββββ βββββ
Even if in βββ ββββ β ββββββββββ βββ ββββββ ββ ββββββββββ ββββββββββββββ ββ ββ βββββββββ ββ ββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββββ ββββ βββββ ββββ βββββ βββ βββββββββββββ ββ βββββ ββ ββββββββββ βββββββββ
If two statements βββ βββββ ββ ββ ββββββββββββ ββββ ββββ βββββ βββ ββ βββ ββ βββ ββββββββββ ββ βββββ ββ ββ ββββββ ββ ββββββ ββ βββββββ ββββ βββββ βββββ βββββ ββββ βββ βββββ βββββββββ ββ βββββ