#23 - Kira: It would be unwise for you to buy that insurance

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (D).

This Method of Reasoning question asks us to describe how Binh responded to Kira. Binh accepted Kira's premises about insurance companies trying to make profits, but said that those premises do not necessarily prove her conclusion. Note that Binh never says that her conclusion is false, but only that it is not supported. That is an important distinction, and will be the source of at least one wrong answer! The correct answer must accurately describe what Binh did, so any answer that describes something that did not occur must be incorrect.

Answer choice (A): Binh never suggests that Kira overlooked any particular fact, and nothing Binh said suggests a conflict with Kira's conclusion. In fact, Binh accepts the facts presented by Kira, and does not introduce any new facts.

Answer choice (B): Binh did not deny Kira's premises - he accepted them! Thus this answer does not describe what happened in the stimulus.

Answer choice (C): This answer is half right, half wrong. Binh did indeed argue that Kira's premises were inadequate, but at no point does he say anything to suggest that they contradict the conclusion.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. This is an accurate description of exactly what happened in the stimulus - Binh did concede (accept as true) Kira's premises, he did not deny her conclusion, and he did assert that the premises did not support her conclusion.

Answer choice (E): Binh claims that Kira's claims do NOT support her conclusion, so this answer describes exactly the opposite of what happened. In addition, Binh never suggested that the premises conflict with each other. They just don't support the conclusion!

[ShannonOh22]

I'm extremely confused on this question. I chose A - "suggesting that Kira has overlooked a fact that, although consistent with her premises, is in direct conflict with her conclusion". Is this not exactly what Binh does?

Kira's argument:
Premise #1: "[That insurance policy] is designed to make money for the company that sells it to you."
Premise #2: "They (the insurers) set the prices to ensure profits."
Conclusion: "It would be unwise for you to buy that insurance policy."

Binh responds with:
"Undeniably, the insurer is in the business to make money."
This is the fact that, though consistent with her premises, Kira has overlooked.

"But the mere fact that an insurer draws a profit in no way implies that buying one of its policies is unwise."
This conflicts directly with her conclusion that buying the policy is unwise.

Answer choice D seems to me completely incorrect:
"Conceding Kira's premises without denying her conclusion, while asserting that the latter does not follow from the former."

Binh 100% denies Kira's conclusion...I can see the concession of the premises, but I cannot come to terms with the second part of this answer choice. Please help!!

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Shannon!

Look again at what you've labeled as the fact that Kira has overlooked: "Undeniably, the insurer is in business to make money." Kira hasn't overlooked that fact--it's her entire premise. Why does she think that it would be unwise to buy that insurance policy? Because it's designed to make money for the company selling it--in other words, because the insurer is in business to make money. Binh is agreeing with her premise here, that's why he uses the term "undeniably." He agrees that the company is in business to make money, he just doesn't think that fact alone is enough to conclude that it is unwise to buy one of its policies.

Binh does not deny Kira's conclusion--he does not say that it is NOT unwise to buy the insurance policy. He just argues that her premise (that the insurer is out to make money) is not enough to prove her conclusion (that buying the policy is unwise). That's what answer choice (D) says. He concedes (or agrees) with her premises (insurer is trying to make money), he does not deny her conclusion (he never says it is NOT unwise to purchase the policy), he simply states that her conclusion does not follow from her premises.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[Legallyconfused]

Hi there!

I just was wondering about the language in the correct answer choice D. First it says, "conceding Kira's premises." I definitely do see that occurring, because Binh says that it is undeniable the the insurers are trying to make money. Then the answer says, "without denying her conclusion." So this is the part that made me not pick this answer. I mean Binh isn't explicitly denying Kira's conclusion that it is unwise, but Binh is kind of implying that her conclusion is incorrect right? Or maybe no incorrect, but more so not necessarily true. So I guess by Binh saying that Kira's premises "in no way implies" her conclusion that it is "unwise", Binh is not necessarily denying Kira's conclusion, but rather (as the answer choice says) saying that the premises she gives do not necessarily lead to that conclusion. So Binh is saying maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. Binh is not confirming Kira's conclusion, but Binh is not denying it either. Is this right?

Thanks!

[Adam Tyson]

That's exactly right! Binh never denies Kira's conclusion, but just suggests that it does not necessarily follow from her (admittedly true) premises. Good job!

[npant120]

I had a question about why C is incorrect and D is correct - I was stuck between these two answers for a while, but ended up choosing C. The thing that got me to choose C was the language that Binh says her premise "in no way implies..." which I thought meant Binh was saying they are inadequate to prove her conclusion. Can someone explain why C was not a good answer choice and D is better? Thank you!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi npant120!

Answer choice (C) states that Binh responds by "arguing that Kira's premises are not only inadequate to prove her conclusion but in fact point strongly toward its being false."

Kira's conclusion is, "It would be unwise for you to buy that insurance policy." The reasoning she provides in support of this is that the policy is designed to make the insurance company money. What seems especially problematic with (C) is that it mentions Bihn responding by indicating that Kira's premises "in fact point strongly toward [the conclusion] being false." Bihn doesn't explicitly indicate that Kira's conclusion is false.

Rather, Bihn indicates that the premises "in no way imply" the conclusion. That is, the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. This is what is reflected by answer choice (D).

[miriamson07]

Hello,

I do see why answer choice D is correct and agree that it is the best answer choice among all given. However, I am also a bit unclear on why answer choice A is incorrect.

To me, it appears that Binh's point that "the mere fact that an insurer draws a profit in no way implies that buying one of its policies is unwise" is a fact that Kira overlooked.

Could this be so, and if so, could we consider the fact that be consistent with her premise, since it can be true even when her premise is considered true? Or is the definition of being "consistent" different?

Additionally, Binh's point mentioned above seems to be in direct conflict with Kira's conclusion that it is unwise to buy the insurance policy, as stated in answer choice A.

Thank you very much.

[Jeff Wren]

Hi miriamson,

The main problem with Answer A is that "the mere fact that an insurer draws a profit in no way implies that buying one of its policies is unwise" is not in direct conflict with her conclusion that "It would be unwise for you to buy that insurance policy." Direct conflict means direct opposition. In other words, it would directly contradict Kira's conclusion.

The reason that this is not in direct conflict with her conclusion is that her conclusion is still entirely possible even if what Binh states is true. In other words, it is still entirely possible that buying that insurance policy would be unwise. Perhaps the policy is overpriced, or doesn't provide good coverage, etc.. All Binh is pointing out is that Kira's premises do not by themselves indicate whether or not it is unwise to purchase the policy.