Question

consider the following example of the logical fallacy of limited choice. complete parts (a) through (c).
he refused to testify by invoking his fifth amendment rights, so he must be guilty.
a. identify the premise and conclusion of the argument. choose the correct answer below.
a. premise: he refused to testify by invoking his fifth amendment rights. conclusion: he may not be guilty.
b. premise: he refused to testify by invoking his fifth amendment rights. conclusion: he must be guilty.
c. premise: he must be guilty. conclusion: he refused to testify by invoking his fifth amendment rights.
d. premise: he may not be guilty. conclusion: he refused to testify by invoking his fifth amendment rights.

Explanation:

The original argument's premise is "He refused to testify by invoking his Fifth Amendment rights" and the conclusion is "he must be guilty". We need to match the option where the premise and conclusion align with this. Option B has the premise "He refused to testify by invoking his Fifth Amendment rights" and conclusion "He must be guilty", which matches the original argument's structure.

Answer:

B. Premise: He refused to testify by invoking his Fifth Amendment rights. Conclusion: He must be guilty.