Help with the Phrase “Fails to Establish that…”

Started by FosterNsoah · started 2023-08-02 15:43 · last activity 2023-08-08 20:19 · 1 reply

This is a good one: Answer choice makes sense because: +GL—>+PF—> +GG Contra/negate and reverse: -GG—>-PF—>-GL THUS: +PF—>?? What should have been here in a logically sound argument? Passage-Conclusion: +PF —> +GL Is the question attempting to address +Good Government being left out of the equation?

Replies

  1. Emil-Kunkin · 2023-08-08 20:19

    Hi, I think you might have flipped your diagram. The argument tells us that the core of government is good law and police, meaning that those are necessary conditions for good government. So really, it's saying If g then gl and pf. We also know that well paid police are necessary for gl. However, we have no idea whether these things guarantee good government. Moreover, good government ent is kinda a red herring here. The conclusion is just an illegal reversal of the police and law statement. By asking what it fails to establish the question is just asking us what the argument is missing that could be a possible flaw. The argument is missing the fact that just because well paid police exist,we do not necessarily have to have a good legal system.

Sign in to reply.