Detective: People who repeatedly commit crimes like embezzlement or bribery without being caught tend to become more ...

SamA on January 2, 2020

Hello @nivensdc,

On strengthen w/necessary questions, remember to ask yourself, "Does the argument need this to be true?"

Let's talk about D. We know from the detective's argument that multiple successful crimes will create more confidence, but also a greater likelihood of being caught. Does the detective ever say that confidence=carelessness? No. This is just a possible explanation of the increased likelihood of capture. It could be true, but we do not need it to be true. Try the negation test, and see that the argument still stands. More crimes committed may simply mean more evidence, which has nothing to do with increasing carelessness.

The conclusions states: "Most people who commit embezzlement or bribery will eventually be caught."

This is based on the premises about repeated crimes and confidence. What, specifically, are those premises referring to? Repeat offenders. We have no idea what the likelihood of capture is for someone who commits a crime only once. The only way we can make a conclusion about "most people" is if most people are repeat offenders. Otherwise, we do not have the information to make the conclusion. This is why A is correct. Think about what information the premises provide, and how they lead to the conclusion.

aseikhon11 on September 16, 2020

why not c?

Emil-Kunkin on November 11 at 04:12PM

The author doesn't have to believe anything about these specific crimes relative to other types of crimes. The author might be discussing them because they are crimes that require some planning. We have no idea about relative rates of solving crimes based on the passage.