Historian: Anyone who thinks that

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match14% picked this

   The pursuit of paradise does not

   This isn't a rule that puts " ---> murderer" on the right of the arrow. This would say, "if pursuing paradise --> murder not justified" But the conclusion isn't saying, "So these murders were wrong / These murders were unjustified". It's saying, "some of these people were murderers". This answer doesn't give us any way to prove that someone was a murderer.

   14%
2. B

   Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

   The pursuit of paradise justifies

   This isn't a rule that puts " ---> murderer" on the right of the arrow. In fact, it's not even talking about "murder".

   1%
3. C

   Correct79% picked this

   Execution in pursuit of what is later found to be unattainable

   Why this is right

   This is a rule that puts " ---> murderer" on the right of the arrow. This says, execute people in pursuit of what is later found to ? murder be unattainable Does the trigger apply? Do we know that some of the ordinary people of Q executed people in pursuit of what is later found to be unattainable? Yes. We know that some ordinary people of Q were part of this regime, and they were in pursuit of paradise. The regime "executed many people in pursuit of its goal", but the goal was later found to be unrealizable (i.e. unattainable). So the trigger is applicable, and the rule outputs the idea that doing what the regime did counts as murder. Thus we've strengthened, if not outright proven, the conclusion that some ordinary people of Q were murderers.

   Skill tested: Principle-Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   79%
4. D

   Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

   Fanaticism in pursuit of paradise constitutes

   This isn't a rule that puts " ---> murderer" on the right of the arrow. In fact, it's not even talking about "murder". This rule would allow us to prove that someone did something "inhumane", but we're trying to prove they are murderers.

   1%
5. E

   Bad Conclusion Match5% picked this

   Enthusiasm in pursuit of what is eventually found to be unattainable

   This isn't a rule that puts " ---> murderer" on the right of the arrow. In fact, it's not even talking about "murder". This rule would allow us to prove that someone did something "fanatical", but we're trying to prove they are murderers.

   5%