No nonfiction book published by Carriage Books has ever earned a profit. Since Carriage Books earned a profit on ever...

Mazen on May 27 at 12:26AM

Reason for eliminating D

Hi I read the post concerning the elimination of answer-choice D. Nevertheless, I still have two questions: One, is my diagram of D below correct? And two, is my reasoning for eliminating D correct? (Not that I disagree with has been reasoned by the expert, but I am not able to comprehend it.) D states: "James Benson has never done business with the city of Waldville. Since Waldville only maintains business files on individuals that it does business with, it clearly does not have a business file on James Benson." The first sentence is a premise symbolized as follows: ~B The second sentence includes a rule and the conclusion. The rule - "Waldville only maintains business files on individuals that it does business with" - is a conditional rule to which the sufficient condition is "Waldville only maintains files on individuals," and the necessary part is "it does business with." The necessary part is symbolized as MF, and the sufficient as B. Accordingly, the diagram and its contrapositive would respectively look as follows: The Rule: MF------>B Its Contrapositive: ~B----->~MF The conclusion, the second clause of the second sentence, is: "it clearly does not have a business file on James Benson." The conclusion is symbolized as: ~MF In retrospect, the premise (or the first sentence), ~B, invokes the sufficient condition of the contrapositive, and concludes the ~MF. Again, per my first question, please tell me is my diagram above correct? Per my second question, my reasoning for eliminating D is that C is a closer match to the stimulus because both C and the stimulus trigger the rule with a premise that is temporally limited: "last year." D does not trigger the rule within a timely restriction. And it's not because both C and the stimulus used the exact temporal/timely limitation, "last year," within the premise, although that helped, but because they both used narrow timeline; D, on the other hand, uses no such time constraint within the premise that triggers the rule. Otherwise, with the exception of the time constraint, all three arguments, the simulus, C, and D are valid and matching logically! Is the lack of time limitation in D a sufficiently good reason for eliminating it? If not, I, please, need an expert to explain why D should be eliminated. Thank You Mazen

Replies

Mazen on May 27 at 01:05AM

Hi

I read the post concerning the elimination of answer-choice D.

Nevertheless, I still have two questions:
One, is my diagram of D below correct?
And two, is my reasoning for eliminating D correct? (Not that I disagree with has been reasoned by the expert, but I am not able to comprehend it.)

D states:
"James Benson has never done business with the city of Waldville. Since Waldville only maintains business files on individuals that it does business with, it clearly does not have a business file on James Benson."

The first sentence is a premise symbolized as follows: ~B

The second sentence includes a rule and the conclusion.

The rule - "Waldville only maintains business files on individuals that it does business with" - is a conditional rule to which the sufficient condition is "Waldville only maintains files on individuals," and the necessary part is "it does business with."
The necessary part is symbolized as MF, and the sufficient as B.

Accordingly, the diagram and its contrapositive would respectively look as follows:
The Rule: MF------>B
Its Contrapositive: ~B----->~MF

The conclusion, the second clause of the second sentence, is: "it clearly does not have a business file on James Benson."
The conclusion is symbolized as: ~MF

In retrospect, the premise (or the first sentence), ~B, invokes the sufficient condition of the contrapositive, and concludes the ~MF.

Again, per my first question, please tell me is my diagram above correct?

Per my second question, my reasoning for eliminating D is that C is a closer match to the stimulus because both C and the stimulus trigger the rule with a premise that is temporally limited: "last year." D does not trigger the rule within a timely restriction. And it's not because both C and the stimulus used the exact temporal/timely limitation, "last year," within the premise, although that helped, but because they both used narrow timeline; D, on the other hand, uses no such time constraint within the premise that triggers the rule.

Otherwise, with the exception of the time constraint, all three arguments, the simulus, C, and D are valid and matching logically!

Is the lack of time limitation in D a sufficiently good reason for eliminating it?

If not, I, please, need an expert to explain why D should be eliminated.

Thank You
Mazen

Mazen on May 30 at 04:14PM

Hi

I read the post concerning the elimination of answer-choice D.

Nevertheless, I still have two questions:
One, is my diagram of D below correct?
And two, is my reasoning for eliminating D correct? (Not that I disagree with has been reasoned by the expert, but I am not able to comprehend it.)

D states:
"James Benson has never done business with the city of Waldville. Since Waldville only maintains business files on individuals that it does business with, it clearly does not have a business file on James Benson."

The first sentence is a premise symbolized as follows: ~B

The second sentence includes a rule and the conclusion.

The rule - "Waldville only maintains business files on individuals that it does business with" - is a conditional rule to which the sufficient condition is "Waldville only maintains files on individuals," and the necessary part is "it does business with."
The SUFFICIENT (my apologies, I reversed the appropriate conditions in my previous post) part is symbolized as MF, and the NECESSARY is symbolized (again my apologies for having reversed the conditions in my previous posts) as B.

Accordingly, the diagram and its contrapositive would respectively look as follows:
The Rule: MF------>B
Its Contrapositive: ~B----->~MF

The conclusion, the second clause of the second sentence, is: "it clearly does not have a business file on James Benson."
The conclusion is symbolized as: ~MF

In retrospect, the premise (or the first sentence), ~B, invokes the sufficient condition of the contrapositive, and concludes the ~MF.

Again, per my first question, please tell me is my diagram above correct?

Per my second question, my reasoning for eliminating D is that C is a closer match to the stimulus because both C and the stimulus trigger the rule with a premise that is temporally limited: "last year." D does not trigger the rule within a timely restriction. And it's not because both C and the stimulus used the exact temporal/timely limitation, "last year," within the premise, although that helped, but because they both used narrow timeline; D, on the other hand, uses no such time constraint within the premise that triggers the rule.

Otherwise, with the exception of the time constraint, all three arguments, the simulus, C, and D are valid and matching logically!

Is the lack of time limitation in D a sufficiently good reason for eliminating it?

If not, I, please, need an expert to explain why D should be eliminated.

Thank You
Mazen

Emil on June 1 at 01:38AM

Hi Mazen,

We could diagram the initial argument as follows

If Nonfiction -> No Profit
If published last year -> Profit
Thus, no published nonfiction.

I would probably diagram (D) as follows:
If JB - Not B
If BF - Business
Thus no business file on JB.

Everyone will diagram differently, but I think yours looks good.

I think your time restriction is an important point, but there is another, likely more notable reason to eliminate D. Both the stimulus and (C) introduce the idea of two things- in the stimulus a book is either fiction or nonfiction, and in C we have marketing and systems analysts. In D we only have one thing, business files. I think that this is why D is not a match for the passage, although I think the time frame is also a reason to eliminate D.

Emil on June 1 at 01:39AM

Hi Mazen,

(it looks like your message was posted twice, so adding my response to this as well if anyone has the same question in the future)
We could diagram the initial argument as follows

If Nonfiction -> No Profit
If published last year -> Profit
Thus, no published nonfiction.

I would probably diagram (D) as follows:
If JB - Not B
If BF - Business
Thus no business file on JB.

Everyone will diagram differently, but I think yours looks good.

I think your time restriction is an important point, but there is another, likely more notable reason to eliminate D. Both the stimulus and (C) introduce the idea of two things- in the stimulus a book is either fiction or nonfiction, and in C we have marketing and systems analysts. In D we only have one thing, business files. I think that this is why D is not a match for the passage, although I think the time frame is also a reason to eliminate D.

Mazen on June 1 at 11:10PM

Emil
Your point, regarding the introduction of two things as opposed to just one, is well-taken!
Thank You