Wang Jie said in the staff group: "The company's old policy states that employees with ten years of service receive a long-service award. I have completed ten years, so the company must give me this award." HR replied: That policy was abolished three years ago; the new scheme uses a points-exchange system. Which of the following evaluations is most accurate?

Answer: B

• AThis is inductive reasoning; it draws a conclusion from only Wang Jie's single case, so the sample is too small to be reliable.✗ Incorrect. Wang Jie applies a rule to a particular case, which is deductive reasoning; there is no process of generalizing from multiple instances. This option reflects the misunderstanding of confusing deduction with induction.
• BThe reasoning form is valid, but the major premise that "the policy is still in effect" is not true, so the conclusion does not necessarily follow.✓ Correct. The deductive form of deriving a particular case from a rule is fine, but a deductive conclusion requires that the premises be true and applicable to the situation. Since the policy has been abolished, the premise that the policy is currently effective is false, so the conclusion does not necessarily follow.
• CThe necessity of a deductive conclusion depends only on its form; as long as the service years are accurate, the conclusion of awarding the bonus necessarily follows.✗ Incorrect. A deductive conclusion necessarily follows only if both the premises are true and the form is valid; the abolition of the policy makes the major premise invalid, so even if the service years are accurate, the necessity does not hold. This option reflects the misunderstanding of focusing only on form while ignoring the truth of premises.
• DBoth the old and new policies reward long service; based on this similarity, the old policy can be applied by analogy, and the award still holds.✗ Incorrect. The similarity that both policies reward long service is superficial; analogy can only suggest ideas, not prove that the abolished policy's effect remains. Whether the similarity is relevant to the current obligation is exactly what must be questioned. This option reflects the misunderstanding of treating analogy as proof.