- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8917
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Tue May 31, 2016 4:43 pm
#25819
Complete Question Explanation
Justify the Conclusion—PR, SN. The correct answer choice is (C)
In this argument, the stimulus author gives us a conditional principle, and then an application of that principle. The principle begins with the necessary condition, and can be diagrammed as:
ODP = professor makes an official determination that the student has committed plagiarism
KP-WA = professor believes student knowingly presented someone else’s ideas without attribution
The question stem tells us that this is a Justify the Conclusion—Principle question. To justify the application, the correct answer must provide the sufficient condition of the contrapositive to the principle, applied to Walters, i.e., KP-WAwalter. So, our prephrase is that the correct answer choice will tell us that the professor does not believe Walters knowingly presented someone else’s ideas without attribution.
Answer choice (A): While it may be preferable for the professor to have compelling evidence, the principle makes no mention of the quality of the evidence. Instead, the only requirement is that the professor believe the student knowingly presented someone else’s ideas without attribution.
Answer choice (B): This choice implies that Walters did not believe he was engaging in plagiarism. However, the only belief relevant to the principle is that of the professor.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice, because it uses synonymous language to say that the professor does not believe Walters knowingly presented someone else’s ideas without attribution, providing the sufficient condition for the contrapositive of the principle, and justifying the application to Walters.
Answer choice (D): As with answer choice (B), only the professor’s belief is relevant to the principle.
Answer choice (E): The professor’s intentions are irrelevant to the principle, which dealt only with when it would be appropriate for the professor to make an official determination.
Justify the Conclusion—PR, SN. The correct answer choice is (C)
In this argument, the stimulus author gives us a conditional principle, and then an application of that principle. The principle begins with the necessary condition, and can be diagrammed as:
ODP = professor makes an official determination that the student has committed plagiarism
KP-WA = professor believes student knowingly presented someone else’s ideas without attribution
- Sufficient
Necessary
ODP 
KP-WA
- KP-WA ODP
The question stem tells us that this is a Justify the Conclusion—Principle question. To justify the application, the correct answer must provide the sufficient condition of the contrapositive to the principle, applied to Walters, i.e., KP-WAwalter. So, our prephrase is that the correct answer choice will tell us that the professor does not believe Walters knowingly presented someone else’s ideas without attribution.
Answer choice (A): While it may be preferable for the professor to have compelling evidence, the principle makes no mention of the quality of the evidence. Instead, the only requirement is that the professor believe the student knowingly presented someone else’s ideas without attribution.
Answer choice (B): This choice implies that Walters did not believe he was engaging in plagiarism. However, the only belief relevant to the principle is that of the professor.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice, because it uses synonymous language to say that the professor does not believe Walters knowingly presented someone else’s ideas without attribution, providing the sufficient condition for the contrapositive of the principle, and justifying the application to Walters.
Answer choice (D): As with answer choice (B), only the professor’s belief is relevant to the principle.
Answer choice (E): The professor’s intentions are irrelevant to the principle, which dealt only with when it would be appropriate for the professor to make an official determination.