must be true

[Kmikaeli]

I know that one of the correct answers can be a combination of 2 or more statements just as another can be a paraphrasing of statements. However, some answer choices also combine conditional statements in order to create linkages and others involve a step similar to mechanistic approach from justify the conclusion except it looks at the premises since must be true stimuli do not have a conclusion for the most part. For instance a must be true stimuli will contain Premise:A-->B
Premise:C-->B
Then it will ask, for instance, what must be true or inferred from the information above and the answer will be A-->C.

So, my question to you guys is regarding the combination of 2 or more statements. Does that also apply to linking conditional statements just like we do when we treat them like elements of linkage?

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hi Kmikaeli,

You are correct in that both MBT and Justify questions often contain stimuli with conditional reasoning, where creating a conditional chain is key. In Justify questions, we are typically required to identify an additional conditional statement that, if true, would create the proper chain that justifies the conclusion. By contrast, MBT questions with such reasoning simply ask us to identify an inference, i.e. something that must be true given the conditional statements presented in the stimulus. The answer is something we can conclude from these statements.

For instance, if the premises state that:

A B
C NOT B

We can conclude that:

A C.

This is something you should prephrase ahead of time.

A minor correction to your post is in order: the hypothetical scenario you presented does not allow us to conclude that A C, because B is a necessary condition in both of your premises. We cannot create an additive inference given these premises: they only establish that either A or C would be sufficient to prove B (A or C B).

Hope this helps!