Many valid arguments take certain classic patterns (which have been given their own names). Which argument is an example of the argumentative form Denying the Consequent (or Modus Tollens)?
A. If emotion always overrides reason, then rational disputes are never truly about the reasons motivating us to accept beliefs (but rather are attempts to rationalize the stances we already prefer).
If rational disputes are never truly about the reasons motivating us to accept beliefs (but rather are attempts to rationalize the stances we already prefer), then we should stop treating people like autonomous adults.
Therefore, if emotion overrides reason, then we should stop treating people like autonomous adults.
B. If emotion always overrides reason, then rational disputes are never truly about the reasons motivating us to accept beliefs (but rather are attempts to rationalize the stances we already prefer).
Emotion always overrides reason.
Therefore, rational disputes are never truly about the reasons motivating us to accept beliefs (but rather are attempts to rationalize the stances we already prefer).
C. If emotion always overrides reason, then rational disputes are never truly about the reasons motivating us to accept beliefs (but rather are attempts to rationalize the stances we already prefer).
Rational disputes are never truly about the reasons motivating us to accept beliefs (but rather are attempts to rationalize the stances we already prefer).
Emotion always overrides reason.
D. If emotion always overrides reason, then rational disputes are never truly about the reasons motivating us to accept beliefs (but rather are attempts to rationalize the stances we already prefer).
Rational disputes are truly focused on the reasons motivating us to accept beliefs.
Therefore, emotion does not always override reason.
