Complete question is;
Consider the sequence shown: A, E, I … Jorge reasons that the next letter in the sequence is M, since
three letters of the alphabet are skipped between each listed letter. Which explains whether Marcy
should agree with Jorge’s inductive reasoning?
A. No; the sequence could be listing the vowels in alphabetical order.
B. No; sequences with only three terms are too short to use to find patterns.
C. Yes; this is the only reasonable pattern that can be identified from the terms.
D. Yes; inductive reasoning is a valid method for determining terms of a sequence
Answer:
Options C and D are the correct reasons why Marcy should agree with Jorge.
Step-by-step explanation:
A) It's wrong because the alphabets don't have to be listed in alphabetical order.
B) It's wrong because sequence can take any form. It could be 2 terms used to find patterns. It does not matter.
C) This is correct because after letter A, the next 3 letters which are B, C, D were skipped before E. Also, after E, the next 3 letters were skipped which are E, F, G before I. Thus, it's the only reasonable pattern from the terms to find the next term.
D) Inductive reasoning is based on observing patterns in a sequence, which we can use to decide the next successive terms of such a sequence. Thus, this is true because inductive reasoning is a valid method.
