Consider this passage: "When I first heard the expression 'preponderance of evidence' I thought that it meant some maybe 80% if I had to quantify it. I learned the legal term 'preponderance of evidence' means more than 'reasonable suspicion,' 'reason to believe,' and 'substantial evidence.' But then I learned that 'preponderance of evidence' meant anything more than 50/50. Which was what, better than a coin flip? Certainly not the same as 'clear and convincing' or 'beyond a reasonable doubt' I discovered. What do you think? Should anything more than 50/50 enough to use the word 'preponderance'?" The previous passage is best described as ________.
A) a narrative describing what a person learned
B) a valid inference
C) a fallacious argument masquerading as warranted
D) a blatant misinterpretation the legal terminology
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q1: Assume that the premise(s) of the following
Q2: Assume that the premise(s) of the following
Q4: Consider this argument offered by the assistant
Q5: Consider this argument: "The National Highway Traffic
Q6: Assume that the premise(s) of the following
Q7: Assume that the premise(s) of the following
Q8: Assume that the premise(s) of the following
Q9: Assume that the premise(s) of the following
Q10: Consider this argument: "The kidnappers have taken
Q11: Why is teaching a child superstition as
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents