If a society encourages freedom of thought and expression, then, during the time when it does so, creativity will flo...

mmanetti July 27, 2021

Answer Choice B (S&N language)

Answer choice B states: "We can conclude that the Hillside police department has improved its efficiency, because crime rates are down in Hillside, and it is an established fact that crime rates go down when police departments increase their efficiency." From this I had: P: increased efficiency --> decreased crime rate C: increased efficiency --> decreased crime rate I don't understand how the premise is supposed to be : P: decreased crime rate --> increased efficiency I originally had the correct premise written down, but I changed it after I saw the S&N indicator word when, which should indicate a sufficient condition follows. Can you please explain?

Replies

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

Already have an account? log in

Karen-Norris August 23, 2021

I have the exact same question as above. My initial instinct was to write for the first sentence, decreased crime rate --> (we can conclude) increased efficiency. But then I thought perhaps I was correcting what was supposed to be a flawed argument, so when I wrote it out using "when" as a sufficient indicator.

Karen-Norris August 23, 2021

Let me correct that. I wrote the second sentence as a premise: When Increased Efficiency --> Crime rates decreased. I saw the first sentence as the conclusion of the argument, and at first read it as Improved Efficiency --> Crime decreased. Would it be correct to read the first sentence as, "(because) crime decreased --> (therefore) increased efficiency? Using the words because/therefore to test which statement is supporting which?