I really need help understanding why there is any correct answer to this question.
It says that one of John's friends must be lying, but how do we know that that is true since it is possible that John is mistaken and he might actually be unique among his friends.
Couldn't it be possible that John is the person everyone else is referring to?
Thank you!
Does anyone know which section goes over the difference between upward and downward reasoning?
#help
Question Type: Flawed Reasoning
The Stimulus in My Words:
(CL) Censorship of nonviolent speech poisons society. Those who support censorship of potentially offensive art are supporting something harmful to society.
(CA) CL is wrong because many people agree on what is potentially offensive art.
Premise(s) (if any): Many people agree on what is potentially offensive art.
Conclusion(s) (if any): CL is wrong.
Specific Flaw Type: Red Herring. CA's argument is not relevant
Answer Choice Breakdowns & Explanation of Reasoning:
(A) This wrong because there is no specific case referenced .
(B) Although there is a commonly held belief mentioned, CA does not assume any principle.
(C) CA never attacks CL's character.
(D) D is correct because whether or not the definition of potentially offensive is agreed upon is not relevant to whether banning something that is offensive is harmful.
(E) CA does not use any inflammatory or hyperbolic language.
Correct Answer Choice: D
If the stimulus' conclusion is negative, such as it being untrue that both classes Professor Alban will be teaching next term are introductory, will the answer's conclusion also be negative, i.e. the building in Alton will not be subject to city taxes?
#help
Question Type:
Must Be False “If the essayist statements are true ... could be true EXCEPT? ”
The Stimulus in My Words:
The people the essayist has met are either wise or intelligent, but never both.
Argument Being Posited (if any):
Premise(s) (if any):
1. Wise ←s→ /Intelligent
2. Intelligent ←s→ /Wise
Conclusion(s) (if any):
My Target:
One of the answer choices will contradict a premise or make a conclusion that cannot be drawn based on the premises. That will be the correct answer because of its certain falsehood.
Answer Choice Breakdowns & Explanation of Reasoning:
(A) This could be true because we do not know how many people the essayist. All the people he has not met could be neither intelligent or wise.
(B) This could be true for the same reason A could be. All the people he has not met could be both intelligent and wise.
(C) This could be true because the essayist does not know anyone who is both intelligent and wise. Everyone else in the world could be the same.
(D) It must be false that no one is either wise or intelligent because the essayist already stated everyone he has met has one of these qualities.
(E) This could be true because the essayist only stated everyone he has met is either intelligent or wise and did not make any claim as to proportion of people that are wise or intelligent. It could be the case that everyone in the world is intelligent and no on is wise.
Correct Answer Choice: D
Lesson(s) Learned:
This question reminded me to slow down and be more careful when reading. I initially got this question wrong because I read the essayist life experience as a fact for the rest of the world.
A- Wrong because there could be unknown factors, other than technology, that could change the values in our social system.
B- We do not know that all technology will undermine our values, we only know that labor saving technology will do so.
C- Since labor saving technology will change the values of any social system, a system that does not change would not adopt labor saving tech.
D- Although labor saving technology would eliminate some roles it could create new roles with prestige.
E- The stimulus mentions nothing about whether this technology is foreign.
Is there an experimental section for the Flex?
#help