In order for life to exist

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Many Conditionals4% picked this

   A company must have efficient employees to be successful. And if a company's employees are knowledgeable and hardworking, then they are probably efficient. Thus,

   There's only supposed to be one conditional. All three claims of this argument are conditional, so it's definitely not replicating the same argument.

   4%
2. B

   Weak Premise/Conclusion Match2% picked this

   The fact that the suspect was flustered when questioned by the police might be a result of the suspect's surprise at being questioned. But

   This answer does not feel promising, but technically there is a conditional logic premise: Suspect's being flustered → low probability was due to surprise of being guilty The other two ingredients would have to be a premise denying the Outcome: But there was a high probability of being guilty. And then the conclusion needs to deny the Trigger: So, the fact that the suspect was flustered was not due to their being surprised at being questioned.

   2%
3. C

   Correct81% picked this

   Oil companies are not buying new drilling equipment. But if they were planning on increasing their drilling, they would be buying new drilling equipment.

   Why this is right

   We have a conditional premise: planning on increasing → would be buying new their drilling drilling equipment We have a premise denying the Outcome: They are not buying new drilling equipment. And our conclusion denies the Trigger: So they are not planning on increasing drilling.

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

   81%
4. D

   Illegal Reversal6% picked this

   The price of real estate in a particular town is increasing. And if the town's economy were improving, the price of real estate there

   Whereas the original argument was completely valid logic, this is a flawed reversal. It provides a conditional premise: town's economy → price of real estate was improving would increase The other premise should be denying the Outcome, saying "the price of real estate is not increasing". However, the other premise here actually affirms the Outcome and then illegally goes backwards and concludes the Trigger. Original This Answer X → Y X → Y ~Y. Y. ~X. X.

   6%
5. E

   Bad Relationship Match7% picked this

   The exports of a particular nation have recently decreased. But whenever that nation's exports decrease, its trade deficit increases. Thus, the nation's

   This is also valid logic and also involves a conditional premise being triggered. But this is positive logic, and the original was contrapositive logic. This provides a conditional: Exports decrease → Trade deficit increases The second premise should deny the Outcome and say, "But trade deficit hasn't increased", and then conclude, "Thus exports aren't decreasing". Instead, the other premise affirms the Trigger and concludes the Outcome. Original This Answer X → Y X → Y ~Y. X. ~X. Y.

   7%