Slightly confused on D
Started by
Elizabeth25
· started 2024-05-17 01:57
· last activity 2024-05-21 21:47
· 1 reply
I almost choose D but then went back and eliminated because it says "its seldom effective where jurors are also presented with LEGITIMATE EVIDENCE. What about when jurors are not presented with legitimate evidence is it still seldomly effective? What if in those cases it is effective, how would the answer really weaken? I hope that made sense.
-
Emil-Kunkin
· 2024-05-21 21:47
You're right that in cases with no legitimate evidence presented, D wouldn't weaken (although in those cases we would likely have an independent reason to doubt the verdict), but that still weakens the argument by a lot. The conclusion is that in all instances of bluster we have reason to doubt the outcome. D tells us that this is untrue for a large subset of cases. A weakener does not need to completely kill the argument, just to make it weaker, which D does here.
Sign in to reply.