Match each flawed argument with the sufficient assumption that logically guarantees its conclusion. Consider contrapositives and conditional translations carefully.
- Argument 1: The proposed budget cuts will drastically reduce funding for the arts program. Therefore, the budget cuts will harm the intellectual development of the students.If an administrative action does not harm the intellectual development of students, then it does not reduce funding for the arts program.
- Argument 2: To qualify as a historical landmark, a building must have been constructed before 1920. The abandoned textile mill was built in 1934. Thus, the mill cannot be exempted from the new property tax.Any structure that is granted an exemption from the new property tax must have been constructed prior to 1920.
- Argument 3: The novel's protagonist acts out of pure self-interest rather than a sense of moral duty. Hence, the novel cannot be classified as a traditional tragedy.A literary work can be classified as a traditional tragedy only if its protagonist does not act out of pure self-interest.
- Argument 4: The governor's transit initiative relies heavily on privatized toll roads. Therefore, the initiative will disproportionately burden low-income commuters.No public transportation initiative can rely heavily on privatized toll roads unless it disproportionately burdens low-income commuters.
Answer
Each argument must be matched with the assumption that perfectly bridges the gap between its premises and conclusion, often presented as a contrapositive or through advanced conditional terminology like 'unless' or 'only if'.
Each correct pair matches an argument with a missing logical link to the rule that perfectly bridges that gap. The matching assumptions utilize contrapositives and complex conditional phrasing (e.g., 'only if', 'unless') to state the required bridges logically.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Sufficient Assumption Conditional Mapping