Final answer:
The argument follows the structure of modus tollens but is considered invalid because it assumes that getting a job is the only path to success without considering other factors that could contribute to her lack of success.
Step-by-step explanation:
The argument presented is: 'She would have been successful if she had gotten a job. She is not successful. Therefore, she did not get a job.' To evaluate this argument, we need to consider the form of the argument and whether the conclusion logically follows from the premises.
In logical terms, the argument presented is a form of modus tollens, which is a valid form of argument that goes as follows: If P then Q, Not Q, therefore Not P. In this case, getting a job (P) is necessary for success (Q), and the absence of success (Not Q) is taken as evidence of not getting the job (Not P).
However, this argument could be invalid if other factors could lead to her not being successful. The argument assumes that the only path to success is through getting a job, which may not be the case. Without additional information about other possible factors that could have influenced her success, we cannot confidently say that the argument is valid. Therefore, we classify the argument as invalid.