How to do this drill
- List only stated facts first.
- Write one safe and one excessive inference.
- Test which conclusion needs fewer unstated assumptions.
Material
- Jules
- I can attend the neighbourhood meeting, but I need to leave by seven forty-five for my evening shift.
- Anya
- The budget item is first, so your comments should be heard before then.
- Jules
- Good. I will send you my notes as well, just in case the agenda changes.
- Anya
- That is sensible; I can read them aloud if you have already left.
Your tasks
- What can safely be inferred about Jules's priority?
- Why is ‘Jules distrusts the meeting chair’ unsupported?
Check your work
Finish the tasks first, then open the answer to compare.
Show the answer
Answer
Jules wants the budget comments represented despite a firm work deadline; sending notes is a backup for an agenda change.
How to reach it
- Separate stated deadline from motive.
- Connect backup notes to possible agenda change.
- Reject personality claims with no cue.
Evidence
The shift explains the departure, and the notes ensure participation. Nothing in tone or wording expresses distrust of the chair.
Review your attempt
- Does your inference explain both attendance and notes?
- Could the claim remain true without inventing feelings?
Take it further
Create three inference options at safe, questionable, and clearly unsupported strength.
