The new agriculture bill will almost

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct58% picked this

   Most bills that have not been supported by even one leader of a major party have not

   Why this is right

   This strengthens the link between the Premise and Conclusion. The author was thinking, "If the leaders of all major parties oppose this, then it probably won't pass." And this says, "In the past, most bills that the leaders of all major parties opposed didn't pass." If we were predicting that Mark probably order the baked potato when we go to Wendy's, it strengthens that prediction if it's true that, "most times Mark has gone to Wendy's, he ordered the baked potato." In formal terms, if you know Most A's are B and you know X is A you can conclude X is probably B In this argument, (A) Most unsupported bills don't pass. Prem The new agric bill is unsupported. Conc The new agric bill will prob not pass

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

   58%
2. B

   Wrong Order / Less Impact8% picked this

   Most bills that have not been passed into law were not supported by even one member

   This does more than nothing, but way less than (A), because the order of the ingredients in this Most claim. As we mentioned in (A), this is the correct way to build an argument with most. Prem: Most A's are B Prem: X is A Conc: X is probably B For example, Most Senators are men. Murphy is a Senator. Thus, Murphy is probably male. Consider how weak the argument becomes if we reverse the relationship of the Most statement to the other premise. Most Senators are men. Murphy is a man. Thus, Murphy is probably a Senator. Before, we were reading the Most statement forward. If I know someone is a Senator, then they are probably a man. Now, this 2nd premise is trying to read the Most statement backwards. Knowing someone is a man does not tell me that they are probably a Senator. This is what the argument provided Most A's are B X is A This bill is unsupported. So, X is probably B This bill probably won't pass. The top line should say what? "Most unsupported bills don't pass" This answer choice, meanwhile, says "Most bills that don't pass are unsupported"

   8%
3. C

   Illegal Opposite10% picked this

   If the leaders of all major parties endorse the new agriculture bill, it will

   This argument's logic was If the leaders of all major then the bill will parties oppose the bill not pass This answer choice's logic is an illegally inverted version of that. If the leaders of all major then the bill will parties endorse the bill pass

   10%
4. D

   Opposite, if anything1% picked this

   Most bills that have been passed into law were not unanimously supported by the leaders

   If this answer said that most bill that have passed into law were unanimously supported by the leaders of all major parties, that would strengthen somewhat. We'd think, "Wow, usually a bill that passes has 100% support. Since this new agric bill has 0% support, it doesn't seem like the typical bill that passes. So it probably won't pass." Since this answer is saying most passed bills are not unanimously supported, this is going the wrong direction. If this went all the way to saying, "most passed bills didn't have the support of any major leaders", then it would be a huge weakening idea.

   1%
5. E

   Weak Impact23% picked this

   Most bills that have been passed into law were supported by at least one leader

   This somewhat increases the plausibility of the conclusion, because this new agriculture bill is not supported by at least one leader, so it were it to pass, it would have a quality that is atypical for bill that pass. But it's a very weak strengthener. It doesn't fit the "Most math" this argument is trying to do. good argument (the bad argument we get here) Most A's are B Most passed bills are supported X is A This new bill is unsupported X is probably B This new bill likely not pass. Returning to our earlier example argument might help demonstrate why this answer is so much weaker than the correct one. Premise: Murphy is a Senator. Premise: ? Conclusion: Murphy is probably male. If we're trying to make the move from "if Senator, then probably male", then we want to know Premise: Murphy is a Senator. Premise: Most Senators are male. Conclusion: Murphy is probably male. Consider how much weaker this argument is, if we make the second premise match this answer choice. Premise: Murphy is a Senator. Premise: Most females are not Senators. Conclusion: Murphy is probably male.

   23%