Let me see whether I understand you here correctly -DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:Well, this one proved sadly prescient. Maybe it's easier to think about it this way. Generically, if you saw the following structure: I believe X because Y, X would be your opinion and Y would be an explanation for it. So in this case, if one were to write, I believe you're being overly optimistic about the Falcons' chances because they have a tendency to blow big leads, "I believe you're being overly optimistic" would be an opinion, and "They have a tendency to blow big leads" would be the explanation for that opinion. (apologies to Falcons fans still mourning.)If I interpret it as follows:
Person 2 is ACTUALLY offering an explanation of the case that The Falcons are NOT going to win the game today perhaps!
Why *that* will be wrong (and how) ?
You mean the EXPLANATION part should ALWAYS be EXPLICITLY stated in the ARGUMENT as in your example. We can't consider the sense of the EXPLANATION in any IMPLICIT way through the OPINION/JUDGEMENT part as I did.
Am I correct ?