Question Type:
Match the Flaw
Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: "S&AM" is clearly among most valuable pieces.
Evidence: It's on display for two weeks only, and those most sensitive to light or most valuable will be on display for two weeks only.
Answer Anticipation:
Conversational objection: how do you know it's one of the most valuable pieces? Couldn't it just be one of the ones that are most sensitive to light? Also, just because THESE two traits mean something will be on display for two weeks only, couldn't there be other traits that ALSO mean something will be on display for two weeks only?
Formal Objection:
Prem 1: If X or Y --> Z
Prem 2: A is Z.
Conc: A is Y.
First of all, we can't read backward from Z --> (X or Y). Even if we could, why are you so sure it's Y? Couldn't it be X?
Correct Answer:
E
Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) There is a conditional here. "Existing or Planned --> reflected". We would need a premise that says "X is reflected", and a conclusion that says "Thus X is existing" or "X is planned".
(B) There's no conditional with an "or" trigger here. Move on.
(C) There's no conditional with an "or" trigger here. Move on.
(D) We can create an "or" conditional here: "If city limit or major thoroughfare --> solid line". We need to hear "X has a solid line", and then "Thus X is a city limit" or "Thus X is a major thoroughfare".
(E) YES, we can create an "or" conditional here: "If hospital or historical monument --> purple dot". They tell us "Wilson is purple dot" and conclude "Thus, Wilson is hospital".
Takeaway/Pattern: This probably felt hard to most students. In the correct answer, they swapped out "as well as" and used "also". There were two flaws in the original argument: an illegal reversal and an unjustified choice between "X or Y". However, the reversal is hard to see because they're not using conventional conditional logic words. And the "or" is hard to see because they're using "as well as" or "also" and splittng the ideas up with punctuation.
#officialexplanation