Exam 2: Cost Behavior and Cost Estimation

Correct Answer:

Answered by Examlex AI Copilot

A) Analysis of the Argument Passage:

Issues Addressed:
The argument addresses the issue of whether the speaker's car insurance policy will cover the theft of a car stereo.

Premises:
1. The car insurance policy covers theft of the car.
2. The car insurance policy covers damage to the car's windows.
3. The homeowner's insurance policy covers the theft of stereos.

Conclusion:
The car insurance policy will likely cover the theft of the car stereo.

Type of Argument:
The argument is inductive. It uses specific instances of coverage (theft of the car, broken windows) to infer a general rule about coverage (theft of the stereo).

Missing Premises (Supplied):
4. Items that are covered under the homeowner's policy may also be covered under the car policy if they are related to the car.
5. The stereo is an item related to the car.

Separation of Arguments from Window Dressing:
The mention of the homeowner's policy might be considered window dressing as it introduces information that is not directly related to the car policy. However, it is used to draw a parallel that strengthens the inductive reasoning.

Claims Better Left Unstated:
The argument could potentially be stronger without the comparison to the homeowner's policy, as it might introduce doubt about the relevance of that policy to the car insurance coverage. The argument could focus solely on the comprehensive nature of the car policy.

B) Diagram of the Argument:

```
Premise 1: Car policy covers car theft.
Premise 2: Car policy covers broken windows.
|
|--> Conclusion: Car policy likely covers stereo theft.
|
Premise 3: Homeowner's policy covers stereos.
Premise 4: Car policy covers many items like the homeowner's policy.
|
|--> (Supports the likelihood of the conclusion)
```

The diagram shows how premises 1 and 2 directly support the conclusion, while premises 3 and 4 are used to further justify the likelihood of the conclusion being true.