Final answer:
People are likely to more accurately judge the first syllogism regarding addictive substances and cigarettes, as it contradicts common knowledge and experiences, making its logical flaw more evident.
Step-by-step explanation:
When evaluating which invalid syllogism people would be more likely to accurately judge, it's important to consider the logical structure and the content of the syllogisms involved. Here, we have two examples:
- No addictive things are inexpensive. Some cigarettes are inexpensive. Therefore, some addictive things are not cigarettes.
- No millionaires are hard workers. Some rich people are hard workers. Therefore, some millionaires are not rich people.
The first syllogism (a) is more likely to be accurately judged by people because its conclusion runs counter to common knowledge and experiences regarding cigarettes and addiction. People are generally aware that cigarettes are addictive regardless of their price, thus spotting the flaw in the syllogism's logic seems more straightforward. On the other hand, the second syllogism (b) has terms that are more subjective and overlap in meaning, which could make it harder for individuals to discern the logical error.