General Michaels rejects the use of outdated weaponry. All other generals do not reject the use of outdated weaponry. Therefore, General Michaels is the best war strategist.

Weaken:

A) Rejecting the use of outdated weaponry is not a factor in being a good war strategist.

B) Rejecting the use of outdated weaponry is not sufficient to be a good war strategist.

0

2 comments

  • Saturday, Dec 17 2016

    Literally was about to say what CGR said. I'm going with A because if it's not a factor at all, then why would you conclude that he is the best?

    0
  • Saturday, Dec 17 2016

    If it's not a factor at all, then there is no argument left. Just because it isn't sufficient doesn't do much. Maybe it's necessary. If it's a necessary condition for being the best war strategist and Michaels is the only one who satisfies that condition, then that's a really good start to making this argument. We don't need sufficiency, but we do need relevancy. By denying relevancy, answer choice A doesn't just weaken this argument, it destroys it.

    2

Confirm action

Are you sure?