Subscription pricing
Commissioner: Conclusion I have been incorrectly criticized for having made my decision on the power plant issue prematurely. █ █████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ ████████ ██ ███ ████████████ ███████████ ████ ████████ █ ████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████████ █ ██ ████ ████ ███ ███████████ ██ ████████ ██ █████████ █████████ ███ ███ ██████ ████ ████ █ ████████ █████ ████ ███ ████████████ ███████████ ██ ████ ███████████ █ ██████ ████ ███ ███████████████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The commissioner concludes that critics are incorrect to claim that a decision about a power plant was premature. Why? Because the decision was based on a neighborhood association report, which the commissioner is certain contains accurate information (even though the commissioner hasn’t read it closely). Also, the commissioner agreed with a previous recommendation from this association about a different issue.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The commissioner concludes that a decision was not premature, even though it was based on a single report which the commissioner hadn’t studied closely. This is supported only by a baseless assurance that the report is accurate, and a favorable view of a previous report on a different issue.
The overarching flaw is that the commissioner relies too much on a single, unverified report by an organization of unknown reliability.
17.
The commissioner's argument is LEAST ██████████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ███████████
a
It takes for ███████ ████ ███ █████████████ ███████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ █████
b
It draws a ██████████ █████ ███ ███████████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ████ ██████████ ██████████████
c
It takes for ███████ ████ ███ █████████████ ██████ ██ ███ ████ ██████ ████████ ████ ██████ ██ ██ ███████████
d
It hastily concludes ████ ███ █████████████ ██████ ██ █████████ ███████ ██████ ███████ ██ ██ ███████
e
It takes for ███████ ████ ████████ ████ ███ █████████████ ████ ██████████████ █████ ██ ███████ ████████ ████ ███ ███████ ███████████████