Justify Reasoning v. Justify Conclusion

bluebeans

I was wondering if anyone is familiar w/ any subtle differences between the two? (I did my LR through the Trainer, where the 'justify reasoning' questions are known as 'sufficient assumption', while the 'justify conclusion' ones are known 'supporting principle -- they're in the same chapter, and for both types, you're supposed to "fill in the logical gap").

The 180 Bro_OVO

I'd like to hear some expert response on this as well.

c.janson35

I don't have the book near me right now, but I'll take a shot at it!

On sufficient assumption questions you are looking for an assumption that guarantees the truth of the conclusion, so it's almost like there's a starting point (premises) and a finish line (the conclusion) and you have to build a bridge in between the two that guarantees that you will be able to travel start to finish.

Example:
P1: A-->B
P2: B--->C
P3: D-->F
P4: (A)
------------------------
C: (F)

So the bridge we need to build here would take the form of
C-->D, because this would guarantee we meet the conclusion (F) from the premises:

a-->b-->C-->D-->f
(a)
-----------------------------------
(f)

Based on that logical chain, we are guaranteed of the validity of our conclusion.

Supporting principle are a little different in that the stimulus usually gives you a scenario in which a person is making a decision or a judgement about something, whether it be that one alternative should be picked or that some characteristic should be considered most valuable. In this case, you are looking for a principle that would justify the author in choosing to act in the way that they did. Something that, if true, would allow their decision to be irrefutable.

For example:

Melissa has been having car problems lately, so she brought her car into the local repair shop. While there, she was informed that she needed a new transmission and a new battery. The mechanic told her that, even though the transmission was no longer covered by warranty, he would give her a substantial discount if she allowed them to fix both problems. Although she wanted to minimize costs, Melissa nonetheless decided to only pay for the transmission to be repaired because she believes that her battery may still be under warranty

A supporting principle question would ask something like, "Which of the following, if true, justifies Melissa's decision?"

A correct answer may take the form of:

"If a car has any problems at all, an owner should only pay for those problems for which she is sure are not covered by any warranties."

This answer would really help justify Melissa's decision, because her car has multiple problems and she's unsure if her battery is still warrantied, so by complying with this principle, she only had her transmission fixed.

But a supporting principle need not always deal with the same subject matter to apply. Another way to think of this, for example, is in terms of a guiding principle by which one chooses to live. There's some philosophical theory that holds something like "one should not choose to act in such a manner that would possibly be harmful if everyone else chose to act the same way in similar circumstances." So if you chose this to be your guiding principle in life, then your decision to not run red lights would be justified by that principle, even though it's not specifically dealing with driving behaviors (because everyone running red lights all the time is obviously a recipe for disaster).

I'm sure there's more to be said about these question types, so I look forward to hearing what others have to say as well! And as always, if you have any questions, just let me know!

Pacifico

If you're using 7Sage these are both classified as Pseudo Sufficient Assumption (PSA) questions and there isn't much difference to them except where the gap exists. JY talks about PSA questions as existing along the spectrum between strengthening and sufficient assumption questions because the correct answers do more than most if not all strengthening answers, but sometimes less than a sufficient assumption answer. If you classify them this way there is really no need to differentiate between the two, and if you just focus on filling the gap (without worrying that the seal you make is airtight) then you should be fine.

More here if you're a 7Sage user: http://7sage.com/lesson/how-to-find-the-pseudo-sufficient-assumption/