IS THE UNDERLINED STATEMENT A CONCLUSION, A PREMISE, OR NEITHER?

Q1: Harvard makes mistakes too, you know. Kissinger taught there.

CONCLUSION: The main claim being made is that Harvard makes mistakes.

Q2: Kim Jong-un is sick. And here’s my evidence: either he’s been missing government meetings because he’s planning to quit, or he’s been missing government meetings because he has gout. And it’s pretty obvious that he has no plans to quit.

PREMISE: The supporting evidence regarding missed meetings and the plan not to quit acts as a premise.

Q3: If Doug Ford were one of the common folk, he would not have been born to millionaire parents. He was born to millionaire parents. So Doug Ford is not one of the common folk.

CONCLUSION: The final statement 'Doug Ford is not one of the common folk' is the result of the logical deduction.

Q4: He believes in homeopathy. He claims that vaccines cause autism. He holds that crystals and pyramids have magic powers. Trust me, you shouldn’t go out with this guy.

PREMISE: The beliefs mentioned (homeopathy, vaccines, crystals) are the reasons (premises) provided for the final advice.

Q5: The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, and they laughed at Fulton. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

PREMISE: The examples of people being laughed at are used as premises to support the initial claim.

Q6: It’s cold. It’s raining. It’s January. There’s not going to be anyone at the damn beach.

CONCLUSION: The claim that 'There’s not going to be anyone at the damn beach' is the conclusion derived from the weather conditions.

Q7: If Al Gore cared about the environment, he wouldn’t be flying around the world on a private jet. But Al Gore doesn’t care about the environment. So he’s going to keep flying around the world on his private jet.

CONCLUSION: The final prediction of his actions is the conclusion of the argument.

Q8: Jake Mulligan burned my house down, and here’s how I know: either my house was struck by lightning, or Jake Mulligan burned my house down. And there’s no way my house was struck by lightning.

PREMISE: The elimination of lightning as a cause serves as a premise.

Q9: Hey, he was there two days ago. He was there yesterday. He’ll be there today.

CONCLUSION: 'He'll be there today' is the conclusion based on the pattern of previous days.

Q10: Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. So the superluminal neutrino experiment results have to be flawed.

PREMISE: The statement 'Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light' is the starting principle or premise.

Q11: The statement is a premise. If something is a premise then it’s a reason. Thus, the statement is a reason.

PREMISE: The conditional and identifying statements serve as the premises leading to the word 'Thus'.

Q12: Gun control is good. Birth control is good. Self-control is good. So it makes no sense that my girlfriend dumped me because I’m so controlling.

PREMISE: The general statements about 'control' being good are premises for the narrator's specific grievance.

Q13: The pen is mightier than the sword. Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me. Thus, swords cannot hurt me.

PREMISE: The initial proverbs about pens/words and swords/stones are used as the reasons here.

Q14: God is love. And I love God. Therefore I both love love and God God.

CONCLUSION: The word 'Therefore' indicates the beginning of the conclusion.

Q15: If you eat meat you are responsible for the torture of innocent animals. And there you are eating meat. You, sir, are responsible for the torture of innocent animals.

CONCLUSION: The final attribution of responsibility is the conclusion.

Q16: Whisky is better than Vodka. Vodka is better than beer. Thus Whisky is better than Beer. But don’t get me wrong: beer is better than nothing.

PREMISE: The comparative rankings provided before 'Thus' are the premises.

Q17: For the first couple of years of undergraduate, college is in many ways superior to university. College classes are smaller and the tuition much lower.

CONCLUSION: The main claim that college is superior for the first few years is the conclusion.

Q18: Revolving doors should be outlawed. No person should have to awkwardly pause their conversation when they’re entering a building.

PREMISE: The reason regarding awkward conversation pauses is the premise for the outlawing claim.

Q19: Robert Pattinson should not take back Kristen Stewart. She cheated on him like a dog & will do it again – just watch. He can do much better!

PREMISE: The statements about cheating and his value are premises supporting the advice not to take her back.

Q20: Winston Churchill is a man. Fraudster Bernie Madoff is a man. Not all men are created equal.

CONCLUSION: The statement 'Not all men are created equal' is the conclusion drawn from comparing the two men.