-
amysky_0205
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 193
- Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:53 am
- Thanked: 4 times
- Followed by:5 members
Consumer Health Advocate: Your candy company adds caffeine to your chocolate candy bars so that each one deliver s a specific amount of caffeine Since Caffeine is highly addictive this indicates that you intended to keep your customers addicted
Candy Manufacturer: Our manufacturing process results in there being less caffeine in each candy bar than unprocessed cocoa beans from which chocolate is made.
Candy Manufacturer's response is flawed as refutation of consumer health advocate's argument because it is-----
A) Fails to address the issue of whether the level of caffeine in the candy bars sold by the manufacturer is enough to keep the people addicted
B) Assumes without warrant that all unprocessed cocoa beans contain a uniform amount of caffeine.
C) Does not specify exactly how caffeine is lost in the manufacturing process
D) Treats the advocate's argument as though it were about a single candy bar instead of the whole the chocolates in general.
E) Merely contradicts the advocate's conclusion without giving any reason to believe that advocate reasoning is unsound
OA: A
can someone explain the rest? I crossed out A and D.......
tks a lot!
Candy Manufacturer: Our manufacturing process results in there being less caffeine in each candy bar than unprocessed cocoa beans from which chocolate is made.
Candy Manufacturer's response is flawed as refutation of consumer health advocate's argument because it is-----
A) Fails to address the issue of whether the level of caffeine in the candy bars sold by the manufacturer is enough to keep the people addicted
B) Assumes without warrant that all unprocessed cocoa beans contain a uniform amount of caffeine.
C) Does not specify exactly how caffeine is lost in the manufacturing process
D) Treats the advocate's argument as though it were about a single candy bar instead of the whole the chocolates in general.
E) Merely contradicts the advocate's conclusion without giving any reason to believe that advocate reasoning is unsound
OA: A
can someone explain the rest? I crossed out A and D.......
tks a lot!

















