Any popular television series

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match5% picked this

   If articles use specialized technical terminology, they are not widely read. So, since all academic works use specialized technical terminology, articles are not widely

   We see a conditional that could be thought of as Article and Use Specialized Term ? Is the conclusion saying “not all articles use specialized terms”? No, the conclusion is a conditional and it uses a new term like “academic works”. Original Argument This Answer Premise 1: A and B ? C A and B ? ~C Premise 2: Not all A's are C. D ? B Conclusion: Not all A's are B. D ? ~C

   5%
2. B

   Bad Premise Match5% picked this

   Professor Attah gives students high grades if she thinks their work is greatly improved. So, since she gives some of her students high grades,

   The conditional here doesn't seem to have a trigger that could be split into two things. Thinks Improved ? gives high grades There's no way to replicate the argument structure without two ideas in the trigger. Original Argument This Answer Premise 1: A and B ? C A ? B Premise 2: Not all A's are C. Some A. Conclusion: Not all A's are B. Some B.

   5%
3. C

   Correct72% picked this

   If a biography is unbiased, it contains embarrassing facts about its subject. So, since not all biographies contain embarrassing facts about their

   Why this is right

   The conditional here could be split into a two thing trigger: Bio and Unbiased ? Embarrassing Facts The conclusion would have to be “Not all bio are unbiased” or “Some bio are biased”, and it is! Okay, let's verify the other premise. Does it say “not all biographies contain embarrassing facts?” Yes. Original Argument This Answer Premise 1: A and B ? C B and U ? CEF Premise 2: Not all A's are C. Not all B is CEF. Conclusion: Not all A's are B. Not all B are U.

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

   72%
4. D

   Bad Premise Match4% picked this

   Mr. Schwartz is polite to anyone who is polite to him. So, since all of his colleagues are polite to him, it must be

   The conditional here doesn't seem to have a trigger that could be split into two things. Polite to Mr. Schwartz ? Mr. Schwartz Polite to Them There's no way to replicate the argument structure without two ideas in the trigger. Original Argument This Answer Premise 1: A and B ? C A ? B Premise 2: Not all A's are C. All C's are A. Conclusion: Not all A's are B. All C's are B.

   4%
5. E

   Reversed Premise/Conclusion Match14% picked this

   If a book is worth reading, it is worth buying. So, since not all books are worth reading, not

   The conditional here could be split into a two thing trigger: Book and Worth Reading ? Worth Buying The conclusion would have to be “Not all books are worth reading” or “Some books are not worth reading”, but that shows up as a premise instead. The conclusion involves the right side of the conditional, “worth buying”. Original Argument This Answer Premise 1: A and B ? C B and WR ? WB Premise 2: Not all A's are C. Not all B are WR. Conclusion: Not all A's are B. Not all B are WB.

   14%