33 LR One Question 22
- « 33 LR One Question 21
- 264 of 3815
- 33 LR One Question 23 »
Comments
I cannot wrap my head around C being the answer. If I look at the lawyer's argument and B and E are flaws then C is certainly a flaw too. I don't see the difference in what exempts C from being a flaw, to me it seems just like B and E.
Hm. Something weird is going on here. Let's sort it out:
(C) is absolutely a flaw—and, therefore, it is not the answer to the question.
(E) is just like (C), and is also therefore not the answer.
(B), however, is not a flaw (the author simply does not assume that (B) must be true, which you can confirm by using your negate test), so it is the answer.
Clearer?
Does the reason b is wrong boil down to the passage not saying anything at all about whether the project did/didn't fail, but only about Congleton's intentions?
Therefore the negate test ("the project could fail even without congleton wanting it to") doesn't destroy the argument, because the lawyer is not making any assumptions about the project's result, but only about the person lying and congleton's intention.
Yeah, that's all probably in there.
The biggest thing for me (and the most structural, thus the most replicable) is that in order to show that Congleton had anything at all to do with the project (no matter what the lawyer wants to prove about Congleton's involvement), the lawyer does not need to assume that Congleton is the only way for the project to be impacted. This is a very very common type of bad answer, so it's useful to see its structure now so you can remember it.