#22 - Researcher: Experiences that are accompanied by increased secretions of adrenaline

[99bengardner@gmail.com]

The conclusion is that frightening experiences tend to be remembered better than non-frightening ones. To say that some non-frightened experiences are equally memorable doesn't weaken that conclusion. The meaning of the word "tend" in this context is that a non-frightening event could be as or more memorable than a frightening one in some cases, but the rule holds when the two sets are compared in general. Since this means it is not the element-wise comparison Luke was stating, "all frightening experiences tend to be remembered better than all non-frightening ones", I don't see how (C) is a weakening at all. After all, since the frightening set is all more memorable, and even after (C) the non-frightening set is comprised of some more memorable and some less memorable[1], the conclusion holds.

Were the conclusion "frightening experiences tend to be remembered better than all sets of non-frightening ones" it would be weakened, but I think this is an unjustifiable assumption. All we are left with, when the non-fear event set is established as having some memorable events, is a change in the degree to which frightening experiences tend to be remembered better than non-frightening ones. Like how saying "a majority of the 100 balls are red since there are 60 red balls" is not a conclusion weakened after the hypothetical "now imagine 2 of them turn green."

[1]: Due to the existence of adrenaline being "more memorable", implying there are non-adrenaline events, and "fear events and non-fear events" together makes all events (therefore including less memorable events)