ankitatlnm wrote:
The flaw in the given argument is a classic Critical Reasoning "these two things are similar, but not the same" piece of wordplay. The premises are about the number of H4N2v cases that doctors treated each month, while the conclusion talks about the number of people who contracted the virus. Can someone contract a virus without being treated for it? Of course. That, then constitutes a gap in logic: to strengthen the argument,
...



.jpg)




