[Anonymous]

Is it fair to say that when you’re dealing with words like MOST, ALL, SOME, on assumption based questions that the context fallacy (according to Mike’s book) will prob. be tested. When I think about this, I think about the PT 77 and question 6 (i think) about McFarland and fewer supporters. I missed it cause “most” threw me a twist on that question, and I couldn’t remember seeing somthing like it before on necessary assumption questions. . Although, I am aware it comes up at times now.

[Mike Kim]

Hey —

If I’m understanding you correctly, I’m not sure you can draw such a correlation between those words and issues of context, and I’m not quite sure what the benefit would be of thinking of it that way (I could totally be missing something) — for the q you brought up, “all of M’s opponents,” “almost all of M’s…,” just “M’s opponents” and so on would, at least the way I’m thinking of the problem, lead to the same reasoning issues —

Namely, that we don’t how how big “M’s opponents” is to the size of the population as a whole —

Again, I could be misunderstanding you or missing a key point, but those are thoughts that came to mind — hope it helps — mk

[Anonymous]

No you understood me correctly. The answers is a no then to the first question lol. Ok so goin to that specific question , that is a matter of context right? Maybe there is another group of people who make up a larger number of supporters somewhere in the population . Mike, your answers always help!

[Mike Kim]

You got it — thanks Ltownsjr, and hope you have a good study week — MK