According to the writers at Fortune, insider trading is inevitable. However, if that were true,
then there wouldn’t be laws against it, and insider trading is illegal.
What will be an ideal response?
ANS:This
passage contains an argument. The issue is whether insider trading is inevitable.
The unstated conclusion is that insider trading is not inevitable. The first premise is that if
insider trading is inevitable, then there wouldn't be laws against it. The second premise is that
there are laws against insider trading.
This argument is a deductive truth-functional argument.
According to the writers at Fortune, ? insider trading is inevitable. However, ? if that were
true, then there wouldn't be laws against it, and ? insider trading is illegal.
? Insider trading is not inevitable.
? + ?
?
?
You might also like to view...
What is the main theme of Paul's letter to the Romans?
a. The replacement of the Jews by the Gentiles as God's people b. The need of all people for the righteousness of God c. The Roman church needs a connection to the apostles. d. The sin-producing tendencies of the Law
The fallacy committed by an argument that takes two events that happen at the same time (but are not causally related) to be causally related is known as
A) Non causa pro causa. B) Post hoc ergo propter hoc. C) Oversimplified cause.
The use of cloudy abstractions to create metaphysical systems that distract us from material reality is known as
a. postmodernism b. structuralism c. deontology d. mystification
Which of the following is not a standard-form categorical statement?
A. Some dentists are musicians. B. All dogs are not cats. C. No coeds are men. D. Some bears are not carnivores.