If there is an election,

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match4% picked this

   When you rent a car, you can either take out insurance or not. If you take out insurance you are covered, but if you

   This argument has the right opening structure (insured or not, with each branch leading to an outcome), but the conclusion is different in kind. The original concludes a disjunction ("X or Y"). This conclusion is a comparative judgment ("you will be better off if insured"). That is a different logical move — picking a winner between two options — not the original's "you will end up with one outcome or the other."

   4%
2. B

   Bad Premise Match8% picked this

   If you go for a walk, when you are finished either you will feel relaxed or you will not. If you feel relaxed, then

   The conditionals here are tangled. The original says "If you vote, then satisfaction" and "If you don't vote, then no right to complain" — clean one-step conditionals. This answer says relaxed muscles will likely not be sore, but if they do feel sore, they will become better conditioned faster. That is a probabilistic chain, not a clean if-then. And the conclusion ("sore or better conditioned") doesn't cleanly combine the two outcomes the way the original does.

   8%
3. C

   Bad Premise Match12% picked this

   If you attend school, you will find the courses stimulating or you will not. If your teachers are motivated, you will find the courses

   The conditionals run the wrong way. The original goes from your action (vote or not) to the outcome (satisfaction or no complaint). This argument goes from a condition (teachers motivated or not) to the result you experience (stimulating or not), and then concludes about the teachers' motivation. That's a contrapositive-and-conclude move, not the parallel "X or not-X; therefore outcome 1 or outcome 2" structure of the original.

   12%
4. D

   Correct72% picked this

   If you use a computer, its messages are either easily readable or not. If the messages are easily readable, they are merely password protected.

   Why this is right

   This is a clean structural match. Step by step: the original says "election forces a choice — vote or don't" / "vote → satisfaction" / "don't vote → no complaint" / "so satisfaction or no complaint." This answer says "computer message forces a choice — easily readable or not" / "readable → password protected" / "not readable → encrypted" / "so password protected or encrypted." Same skeleton: A-or-not-A, two conditionals (one per branch), and a conclusion combining the two outcomes with "or."

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

   72%
5. E

   Bad Conclusion Match3% picked this

   When manufacturers use a natural resource, they are either efficient or inefficient. If they are inefficient, the resource will be depleted quickly. If they

   The first three sentences set up a clean dichotomy (efficient or inefficient, with consequences on each side). But the conclusion goes off the rails: "either manufacturers are efficient or they should be fined." "Should be fined" is not one of the consequences set up by the conditionals (depleted quickly vs. last much longer). The conclusion introduces a brand-new term, breaking the parallel structure.

   3%