Hi,
I have this argument: "Because we locked the door, no one can break into our house."
The book says that this is not a necessary assumption: "The door is the only way in and out of the house, and the lock impenetrable."
But I thought that if the door is not the only way in/out and the lock is penetrable then you can't really say that if you lock the door no one can break into your house.
Can someone please explain to me why that assumption is not necessary?
Thank you!
Is it also safe to say that "fails to distinguish" is not the same as "overlooks"? If the AC said "overlooks the possibility that the sunscreen lowers the severity of those cases...", would that be a correct AC?
#help
admin. note: added #help