#7 - Sam: In a recent survey, over 95 percent of people who

[PeterC123]

Hi,

I was confused between answer C and E.I know the right answer has to say something to the effect of providing a consideration the other guy did not consider/new info. Is E wrong b/c Tiya never say that the conclusion is false, she only undermines the conclusion. So if E was to say "presents new info that undermines the conclusion", would that be right?

I also don't understand why C is right, if both of Sam's the premises have a specific time of 1 year, how does Tiya's comment about what's going to happen in years following 1 year undermine the supports?

Thank you,

[Kristina Moen]

Hi Peter,

Sam bases his conclusion (Starlight is free of defects) off of survey results and an additional premise that people are not highly satisfied if there's a manufacturing defect.

Answer Choice (E) is incorrect for the reasons you described. Tia does not imply that Sam's conclusion is false. She implies that Sam can't make his conclusion (Starlight is free of defects) based off of the information he has (survey results). If Answer Choice (E) were correct, Tia might say something like "I have new information that shows that Starlight has defects that the owners don't know about." There, Tia is implying that Starlight DOES have defects. Her actual response simply implies that a 1-year survey might not accurately reflect whether Starlight has defects or not. There is a difference between telling someone that their conclusion is FALSE and telling them that their conclusion is unfounded or unsupported.

Since this is a Method of Reasoning question type, you are not being asked whether you agree with Tia or Sam. You might hear Tia's response and still agree with Sam. However, Tia's response still undermines his support by offering another interpretation of the survey results (the owners just don't know about defects yet).

[PeterC123]

Hi Kristina,

Thank you for the clarification, but my beef with C is that b/c the conclusion is an interpretation of the survey results, wouldn't an alternative interpretation (statement by Tiya) be undermining the conclusion rather than the survey itself? The fact that they say it undermines the support when I think it's undermining the conclusion is making me feel kinda uneasy

Thanks, and happy early new year!

[Kristina Moen]

Hi Peter,

Happy New Year as well! Tia undermines Sam's support by showing that his evidence might not actually support his conclusion. If she were undermining his conclusion, she might offer information that shows that Starlight might actually have defects (similar to Answer Choice (E)). Instead, she just says he can't make his conclusion based on the survey. She offers some information he should consider before he bases his conclusion on the 1-year survey.

[MikeJones]

Hi Kristina,

I realize E isn't the correct answer in this question, but is it not a flaw committed in the argument?

My reasoning is that you would have to accept Sam's conditional statement for his conclusion to be true.

He basically says:
If car has defect, people not highly satisfied.

Then gives a sufficient condition of the contrapositive:
Over 95% satisfied

Which leads to the conclusion:
No defects.

Amy I wrong in my interpretation here?

[Francis O'Rourke]

Hi Mike,

Sam does offer a piece of evidence as a conditional statement. He says that anyone who purchased a car last year is not highly satisfied if that car has a manufacturing defect.
car purchased last year has manufacturing defect buyer not satisfied

Since 95% of people were satisfied, Sam concludes (reasoning the contrapositive as you point out) that these people's cars are free of defects.

Tiya may be offering new information. Let's assume that that is an accurate description of what Tiya did. Even if that is true however, the next part of the answer choice is clearly wrong.

Tiya's statements do not imply that Sam's conclusion is false, but rather that it is suspect. For that reason, answer choice (C) more accurately describes the relationship: it only undermines, or weakens, Sam's conclusion.

It is not good enough for an answer choice to be partly correct. The correct answer choice cannot have any part that incorrectly describes the speaker's method of reasoning.