PT 24, Section 2, Q21, Sufficient Assumption Question
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 11:42 am
Stimulus:
~ENFORCE
~EFFECTIVE ---> ~LAW
-------------------------------------
~LAW
Both answers (A) and (B) seem to work to bring us to the conclusion of ~LAW
A) No effective law is unenforceable.
EFFECTIVE ---> ENFORCE
Thus, ~ENFORCE ---> ~EFFECTIVE
This contrapositive can get me to the conclusion of ~LAW
B) All enforceable laws are effective.
ENFORCE ---> EFFECTIVE
Thus, ~EFFECTIVE ---> ~ENFORCE
This contrapositive cannot be used validly to get to the conclusion of ~LAW because of the different necessary conditions? I want to say that I have a case of ~EFFECTIVE, so I can then link it with the second premise of the argument to get to ~LAW.
~ENFORCE
~EFFECTIVE ---> ~LAW
-------------------------------------
~LAW
Both answers (A) and (B) seem to work to bring us to the conclusion of ~LAW
A) No effective law is unenforceable.
EFFECTIVE ---> ENFORCE
Thus, ~ENFORCE ---> ~EFFECTIVE
This contrapositive can get me to the conclusion of ~LAW
B) All enforceable laws are effective.
ENFORCE ---> EFFECTIVE
Thus, ~EFFECTIVE ---> ~ENFORCE
This contrapositive cannot be used validly to get to the conclusion of ~LAW because of the different necessary conditions? I want to say that I have a case of ~EFFECTIVE, so I can then link it with the second premise of the argument to get to ~LAW.