Whenever a company loses a major

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Evidence Match1% picked this

   Whenever a business treats its customers discourteously, its customers begin to shop elsewhere. Shopwell wants to keep all of its customers; therefore, its

   We are given a conditional treat customers badly ? customers shop elsewhere To match the original argument, we would want to hear a 2nd premise that says "Shopwell's customers have begun to shop elsewhere" and then a Conclusion that says "Thus, Shopwell's employees must have started to treat its customers discourteously." Instead, this argument basically uses valid logic, via the contrapositive. Since they don't want customers to shop elsewhere, they should not treat customers discourteously.

   1%
2. B

   Bad Evidence Match6% picked this

   Whenever the large airlines decrease fares, the financial stability of smaller competing airlines is adversely affected. Therefore, the smaller competing airlines’ financial stability must

   The easiest way to know this one is off is that there's only one Premise (whereas the original one had two). We are given a conditional large airline ? financials of smaller decreases fare competitors suffers To match the original argument, we would want to hear a 2nd premise that says "recently, the financial stability of smaller airlines has been adversely affected" and then a Conclusion that says "Thus, a large airline must have recently decreased its fare."

   6%
3. C

   Bad Evidence Match1% picked this

   Whenever a country shows a lack of leadership on international issues, respect for the country’s policies begins to decline. Therefore, to gain respect for

   The easiest way to know this one is off is that there's only one Premise (whereas the original one had two). We are given a conditional shows lack of leadership ? respect for country's on international issues policies declines To match the original argument, we would want to hear a 2nd premise that says "recently, respect for a certain country's policy has declined" and then a Conclusion that says "Thus, that country must have recently showed a lack of leadership on international issues".

   1%
4. D

   Correct81% picked this

   Whenever an entering student at Cashman College wins the Performance Fellowship, he or she receives $10,000. Therefore, Eula, a student who has enrolled at

   Why this is right

   This gives us our 1st (conditional) premise, then our conclusion signified by Therefore, then our 2nd (factual) premise signified by Because. We are given a conditional entering student at CC ? receives $10k wins Perf Fellowship from school To match the original argument, we would want to hear a 2nd premise that says "recently, someone received $10k from school", which we do in the final claim. Eula got $10k. So the conclusion should say, "thus, Eula won the Perf Fellowship", which it does. Just like the original, it's going backwards on the conditional rule. The author thinks that if something matches the outcome of the rule then the trigger must follow.

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

   81%
5. E

   Valid Logic11% picked this

   Whenever a company advertises its products effectively, the company’s sales increase. Oroco’s sales have not increased; therefore, it is likely that the company

   We are given a conditional advertises products ? company's sales effectively increase To match the original argument, we would want to hear a 2nd premise that says, "recently, a certain company's sales have increased", and then a Conclusion that says "Thus, products were advertised effectively". Instead, this argument is actually reasoning validly through the contrapositive. It's saying that since the Outcome of the rule isn't the case (the sales have not increased) that the Trigger must not be the case (the company didn't advertise effectively).

   11%