Question

Lou observes that if flight 409 is cancelled, then the manager could not possibly arrive in time for the meeting. But the flight was not cancelled. Therefore, Lou concludes, the manager will certainly be on time. Evelyn replies that even if Lou’s premises true, his argument is fallacious. And therefore, she adds, the manager will not arrive on time after all. Which of the following is the strongest thing that we can properly say about this discussion?

• A. Evelyn is mistaken in thinking Lou’s argument to be fallacious, and so her own conclusion is unwarranted.
• B. Evelyn is right about Lou’s argument, but nevertheless her own conclusion is unwarranted.
• C. Since Evelyn is right about Lou’s argument, her own conclusion is well supported.
• D. Since Evelyn is mistaken about Lou’s argument, her own conclusion must be false.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

In this scenario, we need to analyze the logical structure of Lou's argument and Evelyn's response. Let's break it down:

1. Lou's argument is structured as a conditional statement: "If flight 409 is cancelled, then the manager cannot arrive on time."
2. He observes that the flight was not cancelled and concludes, "The manager will certainly be on time."

Lou's reasoning is based on a logical fallacy called "denying the antecedent," which can be explained as follows:

• The original argument's structure is "If A, then B." (If flight is cancelled, then manager is not on time.)
• Lou observes "not A" (flight not cancelled) and concludes "B" (manager on time), which is a logical error.

Evelyn points out the fallacy in Lou's reasoning. She claims that just because Lou's premise about the non-cancellation of the flight is true, it doesn't validly lead to his conclusion. Her own conclusion is, "The manager will not arrive on time after all."

However, Evelyn's conclusion suffers from its own reasoning flaw. Lou's initial mistake does not necessarily mean that the opposite outcome (manager won't be on time) is justified. Her conclusion does not logically follow just because Lou's argument was flawed.

Thus, the strongest statement we can make about this discussion is:

Evelyn is right about Lou’s argument, but nevertheless her own conclusion is unwarranted.