Self-study
A tax preparation company automatically adds the following disclaimer to every e-mail message sent to its clients: "Any tax advice in this e-mail should not be construed as advocating any violation of the provisions of the tax code." Support The only purpose this disclaimer could serve is to provide legal protection for the company. ███ ██ ███ ██████ █████████ ████████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ █████████ ████████ ████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████████
Summary
The author concludes that the e-mail disclaimer serves no purpose. This is based on the following:
The only purpose of the disclaimer is to provide legal protection for the company.
If the e-mail in which the disclaimer appears suggests that the client do something illegal, then the disclaimer offers no legal protection.
Missing Connection
We know that if the e-mail suggests that people do something illegal, the disclaimer won’t serve its purpose. But what if the e-mail does NOT suggest that people do something illegal? Couldn’t the disclaimer still serve a purpose in this situation? To make the argument valid, we want to establish that if the e-mail doesn’t suggest doing something illegal, the disclaimer still doesn’t serve the purpose of providing legal protection.
22.
The argument's conclusion can be ████████ █████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ████████
a
If the e-mail ████ ███ █████████ ███████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ████████ ████ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ████ █████ ███████████
(E) provides the missing half of the argument. So whether the e-mail does or does not suggest to do something illegal, the e-mail doesn’t serve a purpose. Either the e-mail doesn’t offer legal protection, or the company doesn’t need legal protection.
b
If e-mail messages ████ ██ ███ ███ ███████████ ███████ ██ █████████ ███████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ ████████ ████ ███ ███████ █████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████████ ██████████
(B) doesn’t tell us what happens if the e-mail does not suggest that people should do something illegal. So we don’t know whether the disclaimer might be able to serve a purpose in that situation.
c
A disclaimer that ██ ████████ ██ █████ ██████ ███████ ████ ██ █ ███████ ████ ████ ██ ██ ███████ ██ ██████████ ███ ████ ███████ ████████ ████ ███████ ████ ████ ████████
(C) establishes that people might end up ignoring the disclaimer. But this doesn’t prove that the disclaimer serves no purpose when the e-mail doesn’t suggest doing something illegal. The disclaimer might still serve its purpose in that situation, even if there’s a potential people will ignore the disclaimer.
d
At least some ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████ ████ ██████ ███ ██████ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ██ █████ ████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ████████
This doesn’t establish that the disclaimer serves no purpose if the e-mail doesn’t suggest that clients do something illegal. We already know that the disclaimer serves no purpose if the e-mail suggests something illegal. What matters is what happens if the e-mail doesn’t suggest something illegal.
e
Some of the ███ ███████████ █████████ ███████ █████ ███ ██ █████████ █████ █████████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ██ ██ ███
This doesn’t establish that the disclaimer serves no purpose if the e-mail doesn’t suggest that clients do something illegal. We already know that the disclaimer serves no purpose if the e-mail suggests something illegal. What matters is what happens if the e-mail doesn’t suggest something illegal.