Thank you for this, am i generalizing too much in saying that since we had to weaken, we ought to have found the choice that attacked the premises or the relationship of the premises to the conclusion and not give much thought to the background or the conclusion itself? That would mirror your cpmparision of the final choice and C as the final choice attacks the conclusion. And just like in real life we tend to carry the argument forward from the conclusion if we are actually inbested in it. But while analyzing we must turn our attention to the premises? Am i correct?
This was a brilliant breakdown. Please keep these coming! You are a big help
Thank you for this, am i generalizing too much in saying that since we had to weaken, we ought to have found the choice that attacked the premises or the relationship of the premises to the conclusion and not give much thought to the background or the conclusion itself? That would mirror your cpmparision of the final choice and C as the final choice attacks the conclusion. And just like in real life we tend to carry the argument forward from the conclusion if we are actually inbested in it. But while analyzing we must turn our attention to the premises? Am i correct?
Great video but personally I think that it is way to much to break this down in 17 mins while for the the most part i dont find anything useful