The words "immediate" and "now" oriented my thinking around time, which is why I assumed that there would be a strike in the future. I'm sure the test writers did this on purpose but jeeeezzzz!
I found this question to be simple. My thought process was in general people go on strikes to gain something out of it. If you look at it from that perspective, going on strike would cost you a job for a little bit, but think about the benefits of getting a raise from the outcome of the strike. That is why C is correct because it fails to consider that. E is incorrect because it goes against the context of the stimulus.
I understand the reasoning of why C is right and that was my original choice but ended up switching it to E because of the conclusion being "not striking now" which in my mind implied that there would be a better time to strike which is why we need to save the funds. I guess thats my bad for assuming those things but i feel like those are fair assumptions and that there is a good case for E being the correct answer choice.
I was between C and E and ended up choosing incorrectly. I picked E because the argument says "immediate strike," and the conclusion states that "we must not strike now." Those words made me think that this was an argument about when / when not to strike. If we were supposed to just consider cost-benefit analysis, shouldn't the conclusion just say "we must not strike," period, with no timeline descriptor? Am I looking too far into this?
But i feel like we've been told that if the conclusion brings up something the premise doesn't you can use that to point out a weakness. Am I applying this rule wrong?
I think the reason why E is incorrect is because none of the premises talk about the timing or when to strike. Had there been mention about why it would be more beneficial later or why now was a bad time then I could see it possibly being right. Since there was nothing in the premises about timing, the argument is talking about why not to strike rather than when would be an appropriate time to strike. We would have to assume that the argument is about when the strike happens for E to be right. I hear you about the timeline descriptor that threw me off for a couple seconds but then remembered we're looking at how the premises support the conclusion not whether the conclusion itself is true or not. This is just how I thought of it, hope this helps!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
44 comments
I misread C wrong - dang it
Cost benefit analysis!
I guess it's super important when we see assume/presume , we have to negate the answer choice.
No way this was a one star 😭
I gaslight myself with easier questions on the answers cuz im like there's no way its that obvious
All these 1 star questions are giving me a false sense of security
@michaelbabayan Same
22 secs under
gordy stay flexin
your ability to identify the author’s attitude will come in handy for reading comprehension
FLASH GORDON
somehow I got this one wrong but the ones with the higher difficulty correct maybe its time to take a break lol
#help
When dealing with "the argument is must vulnerable to" questions are we looking to attack the premise or the conclusion?
Me: yay! I got it right!
Also me: only one star difficulty :( doesn’t count
Why are we this way???
They all count! ;-)
cap
The words "immediate" and "now" oriented my thinking around time, which is why I assumed that there would be a strike in the future. I'm sure the test writers did this on purpose but jeeeezzzz!
I found this question to be simple. My thought process was in general people go on strikes to gain something out of it. If you look at it from that perspective, going on strike would cost you a job for a little bit, but think about the benefits of getting a raise from the outcome of the strike. That is why C is correct because it fails to consider that. E is incorrect because it goes against the context of the stimulus.
I did this very quickly and got it wrong because it didn't register my click on answer choice C. -_-
As a union organizer, I should’ve taken less time to get this right LOL
As a person who minored in labor studies, I appreciate your service either way. 🫡
oof lol
I changed my answer from C to E on BR... bruh. That premise of "an immediate strike" is evil
i keep getting the smaller levels wrong :(
For me, D was so tempting, but I chose C. I was shocked to find out this was a level 1 question 😭
I understand the reasoning of why C is right and that was my original choice but ended up switching it to E because of the conclusion being "not striking now" which in my mind implied that there would be a better time to strike which is why we need to save the funds. I guess thats my bad for assuming those things but i feel like those are fair assumptions and that there is a good case for E being the correct answer choice.
That's what I thought, too, that the whole point was to strike at a TBD future date and NOT now (for financial reasons).
I think not E because it never specifies a better opportunity for being the decider. Instead, it merely states right now is definitely not good.
Agreed. I did the same thing for the same reason.
Same here. I think it's the word 'now' that the writer of this question added in that plants that assumption into our minds.
labeling this as a one-star difficulty hurt my teeny weeny feelings
FOR REAL
I was between C and E and ended up choosing incorrectly. I picked E because the argument says "immediate strike," and the conclusion states that "we must not strike now." Those words made me think that this was an argument about when / when not to strike. If we were supposed to just consider cost-benefit analysis, shouldn't the conclusion just say "we must not strike," period, with no timeline descriptor? Am I looking too far into this?
But i feel like we've been told that if the conclusion brings up something the premise doesn't you can use that to point out a weakness. Am I applying this rule wrong?
I think the reason why E is incorrect is because none of the premises talk about the timing or when to strike. Had there been mention about why it would be more beneficial later or why now was a bad time then I could see it possibly being right. Since there was nothing in the premises about timing, the argument is talking about why not to strike rather than when would be an appropriate time to strike. We would have to assume that the argument is about when the strike happens for E to be right. I hear you about the timeline descriptor that threw me off for a couple seconds but then remembered we're looking at how the premises support the conclusion not whether the conclusion itself is true or not. This is just how I thought of it, hope this helps!
Please lord, give me logic reasoning filled with questions as easy as this one. Amen.
Amen
amen
It came down to A or C for me and I failed…
It is okay! Just keep going. It happens :)
this video helped me understand AC that include "even if"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4X-AJtALk4
this was such a good video, thank you!!
union's been on strike, he's down on his luck
It's tough...so tough...