Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaIdentifying Sufficient Assumptions

A legal analyst argues: 'To secure a commercial zoning permit, a property developer must submit an environmental impact report. Any developer who submits an environmental impact report will face a mandatory public hearing. Therefore, if a property developer secures a commercial zoning permit, they must hire legal representation.'

Arrange the following logical steps in the correct sequence to construct a valid deductive chain that proves the analyst's conclusion. Your sequence must start with the initial trigger condition, proceed through the explicit premises, insert the required sufficient assumption to bridge the logical gap, and end with the final guaranteed outcome.

  1. 1A property developer secures a commercial zoning permit.
  2. 2The developer submits an environmental impact report.
  3. 3The developer faces a mandatory public hearing.
  4. 4Any developer who faces a mandatory public hearing must hire legal representation.
  5. 5The developer must hire legal representation.

Cevap

The correct sequence builds the conditional chain logically: Permit -> Report -> Hearing -> Assumption (Hearing means Legal Rep) -> Legal Rep.
The argument's premises establish that securing a permit requires an environmental report (A -> B), and the report requires a public hearing (B -> C). The conclusion states that securing a permit requires hiring legal representation (A -> D). To validly derive this conclusion, we must bridge the gap between the end of the premise chain (C) and the conclusion's final requirement (D). The correct order mathematically reflects this logical flow: Trigger (A) -> Premise 1 (B) -> Premise 2 (C) -> Sufficient Assumption (C -> D) -> Conclusion (D).

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the initial condition of the argument's conclusion.
The chain begins with 'A property developer secures a commercial zoning permit.'
Deductive chains testing conditional logic typically start with the sufficient condition of the conclusion being proven.
2
Apply the first explicit premise.
The next step is 'The developer submits an environmental impact report.'
The first premise explicitly states that securing a permit requires the submission of this report.
3
Apply the second explicit premise.
The sequence moves to 'The developer faces a mandatory public hearing.'
The second premise logically connects the submission of the report to facing a mandatory hearing.
4
Identify and insert the unstated sufficient assumption.
The assumption 'Any developer who faces a mandatory public hearing must hire legal representation' is placed next.
There is a logical gap between facing a hearing and the conclusion's requirement. This assumption logically bridges that specific gap.
5
State the final derived conclusion.
The chain ends with 'The developer must hire legal representation.'
This represents the logical closure of the argument, completing the 'then' clause of the analyst's conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Sufficient Assumptions in Deductive Chains
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Identifying Sufficient Assumptions

Bu konudan daha fazla soru