Supply the missing premise that makes the conclusion follow logically: P: D–most–BP: ?C:B–some–C

Ravi February 21, 2019

@aschoby,

Happy to help.

We have

P: D-most-B

P:

C: B-some-C

We're being tasked with supplying the missing premise that would make
the conclusion follow logically.

The way to solve this problem is to see how we can make a chain to
arrive at the conclusion. Let's rearrange both the given conclusion
and the given premise so that we can more easily see what the missing
premise could be.

P: D-most-B which can also be written as B-some-D

P:

C: B-some-C which can also be written as C-some-B

Notice how C only appears in the conclusion? This is a sign that we
need a premise with C. Also, if we take the rewritten version of the
first premise (B-some-D) and the original written version of the
conclusion (B-some-C), it looks like if we made a link from D to C
(D - >C), we could conclude B-some-C. Let's try this.

B-some-D

D - >C

B-some-D - >C

Conclusion: B-some-C

D - ->C would allow the conclusion to follow from the premises if we
enter it as the second premise. (C) provides us with D - >C, so we know
it's the correct answer.

Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any more questions!

Hao January 7, 2022

What does D-most->B exactly mean? Does it mean that D could lead to most B or account for most of B?

jakennedy January 19, 2022

Hi,

D -most-> B means most D's are B's. For example, if I said politicians -most-> charismatic it would mean that most politicians are charismatic.

Hope this helps!

Kateria February 2, 2022

I am still confused on how D would come first instead of B is it because B shows up twice so it would go in the middle?

Ravi February 4, 2022

D comes first because the statement is "D most B," which means "most Ds are Bs." We write this as D-most->B.