Evaluating relevance and sufficiency of evidence - Praxis Reading
Card 0 of 4
Let me say this clearly: Becky stole the money. The proof is that when I asked her about it she averted her gaze, and I certainly can't think of any other reason to explain that.
The claim made in the first sentence of this passage is .
Let me say this clearly: Becky stole the money. The proof is that when I asked her about it she averted her gaze, and I certainly can't think of any other reason to explain that.
The claim made in the first sentence of this passage is .
Tap to see back →
The key thing to remember here is that the claim made in the passage IS supported by evidence. Even inadequate evidence, when used in support of a claim is evidence, it's just bad evidence. The evidence here is a simple aversion of a gaze, which neither logically nor empirically is evidence of anything. The claim is thus supported by deeply inadequate evidence.
The key thing to remember here is that the claim made in the passage IS supported by evidence. Even inadequate evidence, when used in support of a claim is evidence, it's just bad evidence. The evidence here is a simple aversion of a gaze, which neither logically nor empirically is evidence of anything. The claim is thus supported by deeply inadequate evidence.
Let me say this clearly: Becky stole the money. The proof is that when I asked her about it she averted her gaze, and I certainly can't think of any other reason to explain that.
The claim made in the first sentence of this passage is .
Let me say this clearly: Becky stole the money. The proof is that when I asked her about it she averted her gaze, and I certainly can't think of any other reason to explain that.
The claim made in the first sentence of this passage is .
Tap to see back →
The key thing to remember here is that the claim made in the passage IS supported by evidence. Even inadequate evidence, when used in support of a claim is evidence, it's just bad evidence. The evidence here is a simple aversion of a gaze, which neither logically nor empirically is evidence of anything. The claim is thus supported by deeply inadequate evidence.
The key thing to remember here is that the claim made in the passage IS supported by evidence. Even inadequate evidence, when used in support of a claim is evidence, it's just bad evidence. The evidence here is a simple aversion of a gaze, which neither logically nor empirically is evidence of anything. The claim is thus supported by deeply inadequate evidence.
Let me say this clearly: Becky stole the money. The proof is that when I asked her about it she averted her gaze, and I certainly can't think of any other reason to explain that.
The claim made in the first sentence of this passage is .
Let me say this clearly: Becky stole the money. The proof is that when I asked her about it she averted her gaze, and I certainly can't think of any other reason to explain that.
The claim made in the first sentence of this passage is .
Tap to see back →
The key thing to remember here is that the claim made in the passage IS supported by evidence. Even inadequate evidence, when used in support of a claim is evidence, it's just bad evidence. The evidence here is a simple aversion of a gaze, which neither logically nor empirically is evidence of anything. The claim is thus supported by deeply inadequate evidence.
The key thing to remember here is that the claim made in the passage IS supported by evidence. Even inadequate evidence, when used in support of a claim is evidence, it's just bad evidence. The evidence here is a simple aversion of a gaze, which neither logically nor empirically is evidence of anything. The claim is thus supported by deeply inadequate evidence.
Let me say this clearly: Becky stole the money. The proof is that when I asked her about it she averted her gaze, and I certainly can't think of any other reason to explain that.
The claim made in the first sentence of this passage is .
Let me say this clearly: Becky stole the money. The proof is that when I asked her about it she averted her gaze, and I certainly can't think of any other reason to explain that.
The claim made in the first sentence of this passage is .
Tap to see back →
The key thing to remember here is that the claim made in the passage IS supported by evidence. Even inadequate evidence, when used in support of a claim is evidence, it's just bad evidence. The evidence here is a simple aversion of a gaze, which neither logically nor empirically is evidence of anything. The claim is thus supported by deeply inadequate evidence.
The key thing to remember here is that the claim made in the passage IS supported by evidence. Even inadequate evidence, when used in support of a claim is evidence, it's just bad evidence. The evidence here is a simple aversion of a gaze, which neither logically nor empirically is evidence of anything. The claim is thus supported by deeply inadequate evidence.