#16 - Psychologist: The obligation to express gratitude

[miriamson07]

Is the first sentence necessarily the conclusion because it is broader and is an "application" of sorts of the premises? I was tricked initially into thinking the last sentence was the conclusion because it seemed to me that the first two sentences lent it support. To be clear here - I consistently get confused because I see sentences 1 and 3 and my view is that they each lend support to each other and vice a versa?

Thanks for the help!

I would like to bring this question up again. I have almost the exact same question -- initially, I thought that sentence one could support sentence three. But now I see that sentence three would lend more support to sentence one than sentence one does to three. I think this is because sentence one is more "narrow" than sentence three -- the obligation to express gratitude falls within the scope of behaviors that are beneficial for others. So even though sentence one necessarily follows sentence three, sentence three does not necessarily follow sentence one.

While I appreciate Amber's response to the question, I'm asking this question again because I want to know specifically whether we should say that something is the conclusion because it is more "broad" than the premise.

Thank you!

[miriamson07]

Is the first sentence necessarily the conclusion because it is broader and is an "application" of sorts of the premises? I was tricked initially into thinking the last sentence was the conclusion because it seemed to me that the first two sentences lent it support. To be clear here - I consistently get confused because I see sentences 1 and 3 and my view is that they each lend support to each other and vice a versa?

Thanks for the help!

I would like to bring this question up again. I have almost the exact same question -- initially, I thought that sentence one could support sentence three. But now I see that sentence three would lend more support to sentence one than sentence one does to three. I think this is because sentence one is more "narrow" than sentence three -- the obligation to express gratitude falls within the scope of behaviors that are beneficial for others. So even though sentence one necessarily follows sentence three, sentence three does not necessarily follow sentence one.

While I appreciate Amber's response to the question, I'm asking this question again because I want to know specifically whether we should say that something is the conclusion because it is more "broad" than the premise.

Thank you!

I need to edit my last sentence -- what I mean is that I want to know specifically whether we should say that something is the conclusion because it is more "narrow" than the premise. Apologies for any confusion.