After purchasing a pot-bellied

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct86% picked this

   Amy lives in

   Why this is right

   This choice is necessary because if Amy does not live in Springfield (or is not otherwise subject to its local regulations), the rule prohibiting the keeping of livestock in Springfield would not automatically bar her from keeping the pig. The negation would weaken because it would make the evidence irrelevant to Amy's situation.

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

   86%
2. B

   Premise Support10% picked this

   Pigs are not classified as pets

   This feels like something implied by a premise or supporting a premise. We were told in the argument that city codes classify pigs as livestock. So does that imply they're not classified as pets? It would seem so, but maybe could you be classified as both? That seems like an implausible idea, though. We know that this pot-bellied pig was purchased at a pet store in Springfield. So it seems like the pet store classifies it as a pet! If we interpret this answer to mean "NOTHING in Springfield classifies pigs as pets", then it's definitely too strong and even contradicted by the pet store detail. If we interpret it to mean "Pigs are not classified by the city as pets", then it would seem to be a valid inference, but would still have nothing to do with the reasoning gap between the evidence and the Conclusion. We don't want to pick an answer because we think we can infer it from a premise. We're picking an answer that we think is involved in the author's move from evidence to conclusion.

   10%
3. C

   Negation3% picked this

   Any animal not classified as livestock may be kept

   We are told a rule that "If classified as livestock, can't be kept as pet in Springfield" and this answer is just an illegal negation of that idea, "If not classified as livestock, can be kept as pet"

   3%
4. D

   Out of Scope: dogs and cats0% picked this

   Dogs and cats are not classified as livestock

   Whether dogs and cats are or aren't classified as livestock would never have any bearing on whether or not Amy can keep her pig as a pet. Like (B), this is trying to tempt us with something you might infer from the evidence, but it has nothing to do with the Conclusion about Amy and her pig.

   0%
5. E

   Trap1% picked this

   It is legal for pet stores to sell pigs

   Out of Scope (legality of selling it) Opposite (if anything) The argument is only concerned with the legality of keeping the pig as a pet, not the legality of purchasing it from a pet store. Plus, based on what he hear about Springfield's laws, it would be surprising if it IS legal to pigs in pet stores. If anything, we'd assume the Springfield pet store should not have been selling that pig.

   1%