Ms. Sandstrom's newspaper column describing a strange natural phenomenon on the Mendels' farm led many people to tres...

shafieiava on December 11, 2019

Answer choice D

Can someone explain why answer choice D is incorrect? I understand that A is a general principle that guarantees the conclusion but I felt that D made it clear that she did in fact know she could damage the property with the article, which made it more applicable in my mind as a sufficient premise than a general principle.

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

BenMingov on December 13, 2019

Hi Shafieiava, thanks for the question!

As you see with answer choice A, it is making explicit that if one could have reasonably foreseen the consequence, then they should pay for it. This is how it justifies the conclusion.

But answer choice D only says that she could have reasonably foreseen it. It doesn't make explicit that reasonably being able to predict it makes her liable for the cost of damage. This is the key difference.

I hope this helps. Please let me know if you have any other questions!