No one in the French department

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Logic Match3% picked this

   The Morrison Building will be fully occupied by May and since if a building is occupied by May the new tax rates apply to

   This is a valid argument, but it derives its conclusion by combining the two premises. A factual premise triggers a conditional rule. Unlike the original argument, this argument has an overlapping term in the two premises (fully occupied). If occupied by May, new tax applies. + MB will be occupied by May. Thus, MB will have new tax apply. We wanted an argument where each premise on its own justified the conclusion.

   3%
2. B

   Weak 2nd Premise Match32% picked this

   The revised tax code does not apply at all to buildings built before 1900, and only the first section of the revised code applies

   The first premise, combined with the fact that NB was built in 1873, is enough to derive the conclusion that the revised tax code doesn't apply. But the second premise doesn't by itself justify the conclusion. If we say "built 1900-1920 ? only 1st section applies" and then we add "the NB was built in 1873" we get no inferences, since this fact doesn't trigger that conditional.

   32%
3. C

   Trap3% picked this

   All property on Overton Road will be reassessed for tax purposes by the end of the year and the Elnor Company headquarters is on

   Missing 2nd Form of Proof Bad Conclusion Match The two facts presented are similar to the first sentence of the original argument (which had an embedded 2nd fact that Prof A belongs to the French department). These two facts allow us to derive that Elnor's property taxes will be reassessed by the end of the year, but the conclusion adds an assumption that "if reassessed, then higher". The original argument was airtight, so that's already a logic match. The other big problem is that this answer choice is missing the 2nd premise idea that independently justifies the conclusion.

   3%
4. D

   Correct57% picked this

   New buildings that include public space are exempt from city taxes for two years and all new buildings in the city’s Alton district are

   Why this is right

   Each of these facts separately justifies the idea that the new building with the large public space in Alton won't be subject to city taxes next year: - new building with public spaces (both apply to this building) aren't taxed for their first two years. - new buildings in Alton are exempt for five years

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

   57%
5. E

   Bad Logic Match6% picked this

   Since according to recent statute, a building that is exempt from property taxes is charged for city water at a special rate, and hospitals

   This one is just like (A). The conclusion is valid, but only by combining a factual premise with a conditional premise. The original argument and (D) had two premises, each of which on its own justified the conclusion.

   6%