ajaym28
Lou observes that if flight 409 is canceled, then the manager could not possibly arrive in time for the meeting. But the flight was not canceled. Therefore, Lou concludes, the manager will certainly be on time. Evelyn replies that even if Lou's premises are 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.
E) Evelyn is right about Lou's argument, but nevertheless her own conclusion is false.
Lou : 1. Flight not cancelled ----> Manager will reach on time.
Lou : 2. Flight cancelled ----> Manager will not reach on time.
Lou considers cancellation of the flight as the only reason for the manager for not reaching on time, however there may be innumerable no of other factors that may contribute to the Manager not reaching for the meeting on time as -
1. Weather
2. Air Traffic Clearances
3. Technical Defects
Check in all of the above cases the flight may not be altogether cancelled , it might be such that the flight is delayed, and that may result in the Manager not reaching for the meeting on time.
So, certainly there is a flay in Lous argument...
Lou states : Lou concludes, ]flight was not canceled so the manager will certainly be on time.
Evelyn states : The manager will not arrive on time after all.
Evelyn , correctly points out the flaw in Lous arguement ( As highlighted in red ) but she herself can not substantiate it , and states an extreme conclusion that the " The manager will not arrive on time " , that is simply unwarranted...
Hence IMHO (B)