Self-study
Davis: Conclusion The only relevant factor in determining appropriate compensation for property damage or theft is the value the property loses due to damage or the value of the property stolen; Support the harm to the victim is directly proportional to the pertinent value.
████████ █ █████████ ████ ████ ███ ██████ ████ ██ ███████████ █ ██████ ███ ████████ ███ ███ ██ ████████ ████████ █████ ███ █████ ██ ████ ████ ████ █ ██████ ███ ████████ ███ ███ █████ ████ ███ █████
Speaker 1 Summary
Davis concludes that the compensation for property damage or theft should be based solely on the value of the property damaged or stolen. This is because the harm to the victim is directly proportional to that value.
Speaker 2 Summary
Higuchi concludes that the compensation should be based on more than just the value of the property damaged or stolen. This is because how quickly the victim recovers the property should influence the compensation.
Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree on whether compensation for property damage or theft should be based on more than just the value of the property. Davis thinks it should be based only on the value of the property. Higuchi thinks it should include consideration of when the victim recovered the property.
13.
Davis's and Higuchi's statements most ████████ ███████ ███ ████ ████ ████ █████ ████████ ████ ████ █████ █████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ██████████
a
It is possible ██ ████████████ ███ ████████ █████████ ███ ██████ ██ ████████████ ████ ██ ███████ █████ ████████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████
Neither speaker expresses an opinion. They tell us about certain factors they think are relevant to compensation. But whether we can make reliable and consistent calculations about compensation amounts is not discussed.
b
Some victims are ████ █████████ ████████████ ███████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ████ ██ █████ █████████
This is not a point of disagreement. Davis agrees that value matters for determining compensation, and there’s no evidence Higuchi disagrees that value matters.
c
Victims who are ████████ ██ █████ ████████ ███ ████ ████████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ████ █████████
Not a point of disagreement. Davis agrees and thinks harm should be measured by the value of the property. We can’t say Higuchi disagrees. He may want other factors included in how we measure harm, but there’s no evidence he thinks compensation shouldn’t be based on harm.
d
Some victims are ████ █████████ ████████████ ███████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ███ ██ █████ █████████
This is a point of disagreement. Davis thinks time of deprivation shouldn’t be a factor in compensation; only value of the property matters. Higuchi thinks time of deprivation should be a factor in compensation.
e
The compensation owed ██ ███████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ █ ████████████ █████ ██████ ████ ██ ████ ███████ █████
Not a point of disagreement. Both speakers advocate for a general rule for calculating compensation. They may disagree about specific factors that should be part of that rule, but they both advocate for a rule.