All categories

3 years ago

Grasping a dilemma by the horns means:

2 answers:

8 0

Grasping a dilemma by the horns means proving the dilemma unsound by proving the conjunctive premise false. Although refuting dilemmas refers to proving that the argument is invalid and unsound, if they are valid grasping a dilemma by the horns means to prove that it is unsound.

jarptica [38.1K]3 years ago

5 0

Answer:

Grasping a dilemma by the horns means proving the dilemma unsound by proving the conjunctive premise false. It is used in a condition to refute dilemmas and to make your argument successful. Refuting valid dilemmas will give you a successful argument which is both valid and sound. Grasping a dilemma by the horns is used to show that one of the premises is false.

Explanation:

In a common argument forms and fallacies, we can refute dilemmas. We can do this by grasping the dilemma by the horns. Since a successful must be sound and valid, if we want to reject a valid dilemma, we have to reject one of the premises. Since both of the premises are true, we have to make one of them unsound. Thus, we can reject one of the dilemmas. We have to show that one of the conjuncts in dilemmas is false. Dilemma itself has two premises; conjunction and disjunction. In rejecting the premise, we have to show that the conjunction is not true.

Learn more:

if you are interested in knowing more about dilemma, you can click the link bellow:

1. Ethical dilemma: brainly.com/question/13015186

2. Moral dilemma: brainly.com/question/1236365

Keyword: dilemma, grasping a dilemma by the horns

Subject: Business

Class: College

Subchapter: Refuting dilemma

You might be interested in

A growing trend to "Buy American" may encourage U.S. automakers to increase political pressure on Washington to pass legislation

Kazeer [188]

Answer:

C) a positive result from regulatory and economic environmental forces.

Explanation:

In the short run the whole economy will benefit, more American jobs will be created, consumers will probably get good cars at even lower prices, but on the long run the scenario may not be that good for everyone. If Toyota builds the plant, it will be the result of economic and political pressures, and that is a game that two can play, just ask farmers about the trade deal with China.

On the other hand, this is a type of deja vu (or been there, done that), and it ended up with GM and Chrysler bankrupt and Ford barely surviving. This types of policies were enforced in the 1980s by president Reagan and the famous "Made in the USA" by Bruce Springsteen. Back then Honda had a small factory and Toyota was starting to consider building a plant in the US, Nissan hadn't showed up yet. Fast forward a few years and the only good American vehicles are pickups, the Japanese brands wiped out the rest. The country is full of Camrys, Accords, Civics, Corollas, CRVs and Rav4s. They are great cars, too great for the American car manufacturers to compete against. Who knows, with this type of policies maybe in 10 years the only American car manufacturer left will be Tesla.

This is like playing with fire on top of a fuel truck.

5 0

2 years ago

Consider the three mutually exclusive alternatives below. Determine which alternative is preferable at an interest rate of 9% pe

laila [671]

Answer:

a. AW, A($) = 79646

b. AW, B ($) = 29,367

c. AW, C ($) = 80738

Explanation:

Solution:

First of let's sort out the data given for all three alternatives:

Alternative A:

Capital Investment = $400,000

Annual Expense = $189,000

Annual Revenue = $309,000

Salvage Value = $65,000

Life = 24 Years

Alternative B:

Capital Investment = $230,000

Annual Expense = $122,500

Annual Revenue = $222,500

Salvage Value = $180,000

Life = 5 Years

Alternative C:

Capital Investment = $150,000

Annual Expense = $134,000

Annual Revenue = $234,000

Salvage Value = $130,000

Life = 12 Years

AW, A($) = - 400,000 x A/P(9%, 24) + (309,000 - 189,000) + 65,000 x P/F(9%, 24) x A/P(9%, 24)

AW, A($) = - 400,000 x 0.103 + 120,000 + 65,000 x 0.1264 x 0.103

AW, A($) = - 41,200 + 120,000 + 846.25

AW, A($) = 79646

AW, B ($) = -230,000 x A/P(9%, 5) + (222,500 - 134,000)

AW, B ($) = -230,000 x 0.2571 + (222,500 - 134,000)

AW, B ($) = 29,367

AW, C ($) = - 150,000 x A/P(9%, 12) + (234,000 - 134,000) + 130,000 x P/F(9%, 12) x A/P(9%, 12)

AW, C ($) = - 150,000 x 0.1397 + 100,000 + 130,000 x 0.3555 x 0.1397

AW, C ($) = - 20,955 + 100,000 + 1,692.50

AW, C ($) = 80738

7 0

2 years ago

Required: 1-a. Calculate the future value at the end of three years. (FV of $1, PV of $1, FVA of $1, and PVA of $1) (Use appropr

kobusy [5.1K]

Answer: $2,398.55

Explanation:

The deposit at the end of year one would have been compounded by 2 years at the end of year 3. The second year deposit would have compounded by 1 year and the third year deposit would not have compounded at all.

The future value at the end of 3 years is;

= (500 * ( 1 + 11%)²) + (750 * ( 1 + 11%)) + 950

= $2,398.55

The question might not be the exact same but you can use this as a reference.

6 0

3 years ago

Barney hendricks is interviewing web developers for his company. over lunch, he tells you that his top candidate showed lots of

anastassius [24]

Barney appears to be very impressed by the candidate's non-verbal communication skills.

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

reventive action ____________. a. realigns the performance of the project work with the project management plan b. seeks to ensu

torisob [31]

Answer:

The correct answer is letter "B": seeks to ensure the future performance of the project work is aligned with the project management plan.

Explanation:

Preventive actions are defined as those that aim to mitigate risks inherent in the operations of a business. Preventive actions lead to entities creating contingency plans that allow them to have certain strategies in front of unexpected situations that could harm the firm's operations.

The project risk management plan is the reference that prevention actions take at the moment of recognizing the set of activities that should be followed to ensure the optimal future performance of a project.

8 0

2 years ago