The only songs Amanda has ever written are blues songs and punk rock songs. Most punk rock songs involve no more than three chords. So if the next song Amanda writes is not a blues song, it probably will not involve more than three chords.
The reasoning in which one of the following arguments is most similar to that in the argument above?
(A) The only pets the Gupta family has ever owned are fish and parrots. Most parrots are very noisy. So if the next pet the Gupta family owns is a parrot, it will probably be very noisy.
(B) Most parrots are very noisy. The Gupta family has never owned any pets other than fish and parrots. So if the Gupta family has ever owned a noisy pet, it was probably a parrot.
(C) All the pets the Gupta family has ever owned have been fish and parrots. Most parrots are very noisy. So any pet the Gupta family ever owns that is not a fish will probably be very noisy.
(D) Every pet the Gupta family has ever owned has been a fish or a parrot. Most parrots are very noisy. So if the next pet the Gupta family owns is not a parrot, it will probably not be very noisy.
(E) The Gupta family has never owned any pets other than fish and parrots. Most parrots are very noisy. So the next pet the Gupta family owns will probably be very noisy if it is not a fish.
A. Incorrect structure. It should state, “If the next one is not A,” to match the original reasoning. All have been either A or B
B is usually Y. If the next is B, it will probably be Y.
B. Also structurally off. The proper form would be “If not A, probably Y.” All have been either A or B, B is usually Y. If Y, probably B.
C. Close, but not quite. This option refers to all pets rather than focusing on the next one, which slightly shifts the logic.
D. Incorrect form again.
All have been either A or B, B is usually Y. If the next isn’t B, it likely won’t be Y.
E. Correct. This mirrors the argument’s structure exactly.
