A contract between two parties

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match4% picked this

   Joe made a legitimate offer to buy Sandy's car and Sandy has not rejected the offer. Thus, there

   The conclusion here is "valid", which is not one of the two things we can prove, using these principles. We can only prove the right sides, so we can prove "not valid" or "not legitimate".

   4%
2. B

   Bad Trigger Match14% picked this

   Kenta accepted Gus's offer to buy a shipment of goods, but Gus, unknown to Kenta, made the offer in jest. Thus,

   Because the conclusion is saying "not valid", we're looking at rule 1. 1. neither party accepts → not valid a legit offer from the other contract Does the evidence establish that neither party accepts a legit offer from the other? Nope, there's no mention of whether or not the offer was legit. Does the info about the offer being made in jest allow us to infer the offer was not legit? 2. Someone being made that offer would reasonably → not legit offer assume offer is in jest No, because the argument never establishes that someone in Kenta's position would have reasonably assumed that Gus's offer was in jest. It just says, unbeknownst to Kenta, that the offer was in jest. But the principle's trigger does not care whether it was / wasn't made in jest. It cares about whether a person receiving that offer would / wouldn't reasonably assume it's in jest.

   14%
3. C

   Bad Conclusion Match3% picked this

   Frank's offer to buy Mindy's business from her was legitimate. Thus, if Mindy is a reasonable person, she

   The conclusion here is "will accept". That doesn't match either of our available conclusions. We can only conclude what's on the Right side of the arrows, which here would be "invalid contract" or "not legit offer".

   3%
4. D

   Bad Conclusion Match40% picked this

   Hai's offer to sell artworks to Lea was made in such a way that no one in Lea's position would have reasonably believed it

   The conclusion here is "valid contract". That doesn't match either of our available conclusions. We can only conclude what's on the Right side of the arrows, which here would be "invalid contract" or "not legit offer".

   40%
5. E

   Correct39% picked this

   The only offer that Sal made to Veronica was not a legitimate one. Thus, regardless of whether Sal made the offer in jest, there

   Why this is right

   The conclusion is saying "not valid contract", so we'll use Rule 1. 1. neither party accepts → not valid a legit offer from the other contract Does the evidence establish that neither party accepted a legit offer? Yes, it says that Sal's only offer was not legitimate. By Rule 1, that means that there couldn't be a valid contract. (Some of us may torture ourselves thinking, "But what if Veronica made a legit offer to Sal? Couldn't there be a valid contract there?" Yes, but this question stem doesn't demand a perfect answer. This is still the most supported answer)

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

   39%