What is the best evaluation of this argument? A university was saved from financial and academic disaster by its provost, who later went on to become a consultant
James Hoopster became a consultant after having served as a provost. So James Hoopster saved his university from financial and academic disaster.
(a) It is a valid inference.
(b) It is invalid because we do not know what a provost is.
(c) It is invalid because we do now know when Hoopster was a provost.
(d) It is invalid because we cannot be sure if we are referring to the same provost.
(e) It is invalid because the dean saved the university from financial and academic disaster.
Question 2
If a person is a strong critical thinker, then he must also be an ethical person.
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
Laboratory, Institute of Biochemistry, University of Cologne.
Critical thinking and evaluation
Evaluation measures to determine the success of goals
Localization of a Peptide The peptide is revealed by means of immunocytochemistry. The photomicrogra
Preparing a Urine Specimen for Microscopic Examination (for Classroom Evaluation Only)
Family interactive style predicts academic achievement in high school