Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumPrinciple - Justify

Match each of the following argumentative scenarios with the universal principle that, if assumed to be valid, most strongly justifies its conclusion.

  • Dr. Vance adjusted the dosage timing in her clinical trial without notifying the oversight board. Therefore, the medical journal must refuse to publish her trial data.Scientific publications must reject findings from any study in which the investigators made unapproved modifications to their experimental procedures.
  • Although the director sold his shares just days before the company collapsed, he was entirely unaware of the firm's financial distress. Thus, he should not be fined for illegal trading.Corporate officers should be exempt from financial penalties for questionable stock sales as long as they lacked knowledge of the company's impending downfall.
  • The new electric vehicle battery is manufactured using renewable energy, but its disposal leaks toxic heavy metals into soil. Consequently, eco-minded buyers should avoid purchasing it.Consumers dedicated to sustainability should never buy a product that causes environmental contamination during disposal, even if its production is green.
  • To meet the federal grant deadline, the mayor bypassed the required public comment period before signing the park renovation bill. Hence, the park renovation bill is legally void.No piece of local legislation can be considered legally binding if it was enacted without adhering to all mandated community consultation steps.

Answer

The correct pairings link each specific scenario to the broad conditional rule that connects its premises directly to its conclusion, ensuring the conclusion logically follows.
Each correct pair successfully provides a sufficient bridging principle. A 'justify the conclusion' question requires a rule that, when added to the premises, makes the conclusion 100% valid. The matched principles act as universal rules that logically guarantee the specific conclusions drawn in their respective scenarios.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze each scenario to identify the premise (the evidence) and the conclusion (the final claim).
Identified the logical gap in each argument (e.g., jumping from 'unnotified adjustment' to 'must refuse publication').
Understanding the gap is required to know what the missing bridging principle must look like.
2
Formulate a hypothetical 'If Premise, Then Conclusion' rule for each scenario.
Created generic bridging rules for scientific ethics, corporate penalties, environmental purchases, and legal validity.
A sufficient principle must cover the specific conditions in the premise and guarantee the outcome in the conclusion.
3
Match the formulated rules to the provided universal principles.
Successfully paired each scenario with the principle that acts as its logical bridge.
This confirms that the selected principle operates logically to justify the scenario's conclusion.

Key Concept

Principle - Justify
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Rate this question

Topics

Principle - Justify

More questions from this topic