chetan2u wrote:
The following argument is logically flawed. The author's goal was to craft the argument so that the conclusion follows logically from Premises 1 and 2 and so that both premises are necessary to draw the conclusion.
Premise 1: Every respondent to our survey who
reported feeling satisfied also reported being in a good mood.
Premise 2: Every respondent to our survey who
reported having a central goal also
reported being in a good mood.
Conclusion: Therefore, assuming all of the reports were accurate and complete, every respondent to our survey who
felt satisfied also
had a central goal.
Select for
Boldface A and for
Boldface B two of the boldface phrases in the argument such that Boldface A occurs earlier in the argument than Boldface B, and exchanging the positions of those two phrases in the argument would make it so the argument fulfills the author's goal. Make only two selections, one in each column.
These are conditional Statements. Every/Whenever etc signal 'if' conditional statements.
Important:
The author's goal was to craft the argument so that the conclusion follows logically from Premises 1 and 2 and so that both premises are necessary to draw the conclusion.The argument as given is certainly flawed. How will it follow logically? (i.e. deductive logic) Identify that "conclusion follows logically" means that we should be able to deduce the conclusion.
Premises:
If A, then B.
If B, then C
Conclusion: Hence if A then C.
A, B, C are "satisfied," "goal" and "mood" in some order.
The "reported good mood" phrasing is available twice so make it 'B' in our if then conditional shown above.
If satisfied, then good mood.
If good mood, then central goal.
Conclusion: Hence if satisfied, then central goal.
Fits. So exchange "
reported having a central goal " with "
reported being in a good mood" (ANSWER)Discussions on conditional statements:
https://youtu.be/MmlwcTlHZz8https://youtu.be/BW8Ijrhjjq8Video solution to this question:
https://youtu.be/5G7RYdtP-wQ