Was anyone else tripped up by this question? It wasn't the usual parallel flaw type of question I was expecting. I noticed that it started out as saying "If you believe in A, then you believe in B." And then it said but the EXISTENCE of B has been refuted, therefore the BELIEF in A is false. I was looking for this setup and I couldn't find it at all, and I was surprised that 'A' was the right answer since it said "If you believe in A, then you believe in B, but the EXISTENCE of B has been refuted, therefore the EXISTENCE of A is false."
Had I known it was a simple "if A then B, not B therefore not A" deal, I would have chosen the correct answer in a jiffy but I got confused...
3 posts • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: FutureTaxLawyer? and 2 guests