Subscription pricing
Like many, this is one of my weaker points. It's been a focus throughout my studies and I feel like I'm finally understanding and getting more accurate! I know how to recognize SA vs NA questions, but it's not making sense to me how these questions differ in the answer. For example: "Which one of the following is an assumption necessary for the critic's conclusion to be properly drawn?" I am able to bridge the gap and connect the points, which is getting me the correct answers, but I don't see the answer as a necessary. An example is PT 126 Section 1. The answer is connecting B to C. Then the conclusion is C to D. So how is B to C a necessary vs sufficient assumption? Maybe I'm getting too in my head about it and the focus on finding and filling the gap is all I need to really think about. But open to any thoughts! And not able to pay a tutor $1000 to explain this question to me 🤪
1
2 comments
If the premise is A therefore B. and the conclusion is C therefore D, you have to somehow link the premise and conclusion so B links to C, creating a causal chain where A is ultimately connected to D as opposed to a broken link between the A-B chain and the C-D chain. Without the B-C link, the argument's premises don't support the conclusion, making it a necessary link for a valid argument. If the B-C link was simply sufficient, it would mean it could make the argument true but wasn't necessary for the argument, as there could be other pathways to get to that conclusion.