Even though MacArthur's diet book helped many people lose weight, Conclusion MacArthur should not have published it. ββ βββββββββββ ββββ βββββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββ βββ ββββββββββ ββββ ββ βββββββββββ βββββββ βββ ββββββ ββ ββββ βββ ββββββββ βββ βββββ βββββββββ ββ β ββββββββββ ββ βββββββββ ββββββ ββββ ββ ββββββ ββββ βββββ ββββ βββββ βββ ββ ββββββ βββ ββββββββββ βββ ββββββββββββ
The author concludes that MacArthur should not have published his diet book. Why? It hurt the health of some of its readers, and MacArthur either knew or should have known this would happen.
The argument features a prescriptive claim, but the premises only tell us facts. As such, the author assumes there is some link between the two. We need a conditional statement that bridges the gap between, phrased as βif premises, then conclusion.β This gives us a strong prediction:
If one either knows or should have known that their actions would hurt others, then they should not have done those actions.
Which one of the following βββββββββββ ββ ββββββ ββββ βββββ ββ βββββββ βββ ββββββββββ ββββββββββ
One should not βββββββββ ββ ββββββ ββ βββ βββββ ββββ βββββ ββ βββββ βββββββββ ββββββ βββ ββββββ ββ ββββ βββββββ
One should not ββββββ β ββββββββββ ββββββ βββ βββββββββ ββββ βββ ββ βββββ ββ βββ βββ βββββββββ ββ ββββββ βββββ βββββββ
One should publish β ββββ ββββββββββββ βββββββ ββββββββββββββ ββββββββ ββ βββββ ββ ββ ββββββ ββ βββββββ ββββ ββββββββ βββββ βββββββ ββββ βββββββ βββββ
One should not βββββββ β ββββ ββββββββββββ β ββββββββββ βββββ ββ βββββββββ β ββββ ββββββ βββ βββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββββ βββββ βββ βββββ βββββ ββββ βββββ
One should not βββββββ β ββββ ββββββββββββ β ββββββββββ ββββββ ββ ββββββ ββ βββ ββββββ βββββ ββ βββββ ββ ββββ ββββ ββββββ ββββ ββββββ ββ ββββββ βββββ ββ ββββββββββββ