If Suarez is not the most qualified

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Premise Match4% picked this

   If the excavation contract does not go to the lowest bidder, then it will go to Caldwell. So if Qiu gets the contract and

   In the original argument, the premise and the conclusion both mention Suarez and Anderson. In this argument, the analogous concepts of Qui and Caldwell do not both show up in the premise and the conclusion (the premise doesn't mention Qui). The original argument gave us a conditional that reduces into an either/or: "either Suarez or Anderson is the most qualified candidate for sheriff". This premise does not give us options for a certain thing. It basically says either the lowest bidder will get the contract or Caldwell will (or potentially both, if Caldwell happens to be the lowest bidder". To match up with the original, we would want to hear something more like this: If Q isn't the lowest bidder, then C is. So if the contract goes to the lowest bidder and doesn't go to Q, then it will go to C.

   4%
2. B

   Correct85% picked this

   If the lowest bidder on the sanitation contract is not Dillon, then it is Ramsey. So if the contract goes to the lowest bidder

   Why this is right

   We can match this one up with the original's template: Premise: If X is not most Q, then Y is most Q. If D is not lowest bidder, then R is lowest bidder. Conclusion: If most Q is selected and it's not X, then it must be Y. If it goes to the lowest bidder and it's not D, then it must be R.

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

   85%
3. C

   Bad Premise Match7% picked this

   If Kapshaw is not awarded the landscaping contract, then Johnson will be. So if the contract goes to the lowest bidder and it does

   In the original argument, the concept of "most qualified" appeared in both the premise and the conclusion. In this argument, the analogous concept of "lowest bidder" only appears in the conclusion.

   7%
4. D

   Bad Premise Match2% picked this

   If Holihan did not submit the lowest bid on the maintenance contract, then neither did Easton. So if the contract goes to the lowest

   In the original argument, we got a conditional that reduces into an either/or: "either Suarez or Anderson is the most qualified candidate for sheriff". This premise does not reduce to an either/or. We can't say "either Holihan or Easton is the lowest bidder". It's possible that neither of them are.

   2%
5. E

   Bad Conclusion Match2% picked this

   If Perez is not the lowest bidder on the catering contract, then Sullivan is. So if Sullivan does not get the contract and Perez

   We can match this one up with the original's premise, but the conclusion goes astray: Premise: If X is not most Q, then Y is most Q. If P is not lowest bidder, then S is lowest bidder. Conclusion: If most Q is selected and it's not X, then it must be Y. (should say) If contract goes to lowest bidder and doesn't go to P, then it must go to S. (actually says) If neither S nor P get the contract, then it didn't go to the lowest bidder.

   2%