Committee member: We should not

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct73% picked this

   No one who would be barred from important jobs in an organization should

   Why this is right

   This seems to match the move from “If you couldn’t lead a squadron or a missile wing or a contingent of jets, then you shouldn’t be commander in chief”. Those examples all seem like “important jobs in the military organization”, and the conclusion is saying that this hypothetical person shouldn’t lead the military. It's a weird answer since it's really not using the final sentence at all, which would be the actual premise. It's kind of treating the conclusion as a mini-argument unto itself: "Since person X's history of drinking would bar them from commanding these units, person X shouldn't be placed at the top of chain of command".

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

   73%
2. B

   Bad Evidence Match2% picked this

   Whoever leads an organization must have served at every level in

   The argument isn’t saying you shouldn’t be allowed to lead if you haven’t served in these subsidiary roles. It’s saying you shouldn’t be allowed to lead if you wouldn’t be eligible to serve in these subsidiary roles (i.e. if you’d be barred from serving in those roles).

   2%
3. C

   Weak Evidence Match Too Strong: each10% picked this

   Whoever leads an organization must be qualified to hold each important job

   The argument isn’t saying you shouldn’t be allowed to lead if you aren’t qualified to take on these other jobs. This hypothetical person might be plenty qualified to command a squadron or missile wing, but their “extracurriculars” (their excessive drinking) is what would bar them. We might say, “okay, but if your drinking disqualifies you, doesn’t that mean you’re not qualified, in a sense?” Yes, but the correct answer doesn’t require that we do verbal stretchiness. It actually replicates the concept from the evidence of being barred from holding certain jobs. More importantly, this answer is too extreme because it’s saying that the leader of any organization must be qualified to hold every single important job in the organization. Don’t even think about running a nonprofit, unless you’d be qualified to do the job of being the web designer for the nonprofit's website?

   10%
4. D

   Too Strong8% picked this

   No one who drinks excessively should hold a leadership position anywhere along the military’s

   Too Strong: anywhere Bad Conclusion Match Weak Evidence Match This is saying, “if you drink excessively, then you can’t hold any leadership position”, but the conclusion is only saying, “You can’t be the overall leader”. The evidence wasn’t pointing directly to the fact that this hypothetical person was a drinker. It was more about how it would be a double standard if we were to tolerate drinking in the top job, even though we wouldn’t tolerate it in other leadership positions.

   8%
5. E

   Term Shift: cannot vs. should not8% picked this

   No one who cannot command a missile wing should be at the top of the

   This argument wasn’t saying that an excessive drinker can't command a missile wing, just that they wouldn't / shouldn't; they'd be barred from doing so. We might think, "well if you'd be barred, then doesn't that mean you can't do it?" If we were treating those as synonyms, then there would be no reason to switch from "cannot" to "should not" as this answer does. It would just say "No one who cannot command missile wing can be at the top of the chain of command." But they are shifting from cannot to should-not because those two concepts are distinct. If we're comparing this answer to the correct answer, we have a stronger Evidence Match with the correct answer: "barred from holding important jobs" vs. "cannot command a missile wing". The evidence mentioned several jobs an excessive drinker would be barred from. We don't know if the author thinks "not being able to command a missile wing" is on its own enough to disqualify you from being at the top.

   8%