What is the conclusion of Olbermann’s argument? Cite three reasons (premises) that he offers for his conclusion. What is the conclusion of Condell’s argument? Cite three reasons (premises) that he offers for his conclusion. According to the criteria for rational acceptability identified in our text (see pages 25-27), who has the stronger argument? Condell or Olbermann? What makes it stronger? How might either presenter have improved his argument? Finally, if you could arbitrate between these two gentlemen, what would you suggest to them as a compromise?