A manager you know converses with you at work and offers this argument: “We interviewed three people for the job. The first person had the strongest resume. The second person seemed a lot friendlier than the other two. I liked the enthusiasm and energy that the third person showed, but that person never worked for an organization like ours before. It’s a tough choice. But I’m thinking that the second person is the one we should hire. We said that innovation was more important for us than experience or enthusiasm." Q: If you take all of the premises as true, is the manager's argument worthy of acceptance? A. Yes. because the information given establishes that innovation was the most important factor to consider. B. No. because the premises do not imply or justify the conclusion. C. No. because the argument is circular.