Of the many test pilots

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

   All of the many book reviewers who read Rachel Nguyen's new novel thought that it was particularly well written. So it is likely that

   The original argument said "since the previous pilots were X, the pilot tomorrow will be X". But this is saying "since the previous reviewers were X, the average reader will be X." That introduces a change in category that the original argument didn't have. It would be a much less reasonable argument to say "since all the pilots had no difficulty, the average airplane passenger who is testing the plane tomorrow probably won't have difficulty".

   1%
2. B

   Bad Premise / Conclusion Match4% picked this

   Many of the book reviewers who read Wim Jashka's new novel before it was published found it very entertaining. So it is unlikely that

   The original premise said that ALL the previous pilots had no difficulty. This premise is saying MANY of the reviewers found it entertaining ("many" can be like 10%). This completely changes the logical force of the evidence, so we could get rid of it without continuing to read. But the conclusion is also off, shifting from "reviewers" to "most people" and concluding that the OPPOSITE of past situations will be true (going from "entertaining" to "boring")

   4%
3. C

   Weak Premise Match7% picked this

   Neither of the two reviewers who enjoyed Sharlene Lo's new novel hoped that Lo would write a sequel. So it is unlikely that the

   This has less compelling evidence than the original. Here, two previous reviewers had experience X. In the original argument, all of the many pilots to tried the plane had experience X. 2 < Many. The other glitch is that this premise is actually a subset of reviewers. It's "reviewers who enjoyed the new novel". The conclusion doesn't replicate that qualifier, so we have a category switch going from "reviewers who enjoyed it" in PREMISE to "reviewer" in CONCLUSION.

   7%
4. D

   Correct83% picked this

   Many reviewers have read Kip Landau's new novel, but none of them enjoyed it. So it is unlikely that the reviewer for the local

   Why this is right

   Every previous reviewer had experience X (didn't enjoy it). So, this new reviewer will probably have experience X.

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

   83%
5. E

   Bad Conclusion Match5% picked this

   None of the reviewers who have read Gray Ornsby's new novel were offended by it. So it is unlikely that the book will offend

   The conclusion switches categories from "reviewers" to "general public". The original argument stayed in the same category: "because it was true of every pilot before, it'll probably be true of the next pilot".

   5%