The conclusion is about people applying weaker standards to THEMSELVES.Phoenix7 wrote:But, the argument doesn't fall apart entirely by negating option A because it also depends on the feedback of the other group of volunteers - "But when the scenario was described to another group of volunteers, almost all said choosing the easy task would be unfair". Can you please help me to resolve this paradox?
The volunteers in red judged NOT themselves but the people in the experiment.
Thus, the conclusion is not about these volunteers.
C, negated:Also, consider option C. If you negate it, you get "There were NO volunteers who were assigned to do the hard task and felt that the assignment was unfair". This seems to completely negate the argument because if the people who got the short end of the stick, so to speak, are not complaining then what is the basis for claiming that the actions of the people who chose the easy tasks for themselves were unfair? So to me it seems that C is the better option, though A is the OA apparently. I would really appreciate your analysis and insight on these points.
There were no volunteers assigned to do the easy task.
This negation refutes the PREMISE that each volunteer was ALLOWED TO CHOOSE between an easy task and a hard task.
A premise is a FACT; it cannot be refuted.
If the negation of an answer choice refutes a premise, the answer choice is WRONG.
Eliminate C.