Why is example 3 not an argument with the word thus in it. Your method of solving it requires me to overlook several S>N statements like only and no. When do I know to overlook certain items such as conclusion words and S>N statements.
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
I agree with you that there are some sufficient/necessary statements here. If it doesn't live entirely on land, then it is not a dinosaur. If it lived in the southern hemisphere during the Cretaceous period, then it lived in water.
These do seem to be arguments, but it doesn't really matter, because we are taking the information given as fact. Take a look at this portion of the question stem: "If the statements in the passage are true..." This means that we don't have to worry if these statements are good arguments or bad arguments. This is not what the question requires of us. We just need to take the facts, and find which answer choice is in violation of these facts.
Maybe there is another scientists who disagrees with this author, and believes that some swimming animals could be considered dinosaurs. It doesn't matter, because we are taking the evidence given in the passage as fact. To answer your question, the question stem tells us how we need to approach this passage.
