Passage Summary: Roxanne told Luke she'd finish a report while he was away, but then the deadline got pushed back. The author compares this to getting sick right before a lunch date—if the situation changes significantly, you aren't a bad person for not following through on the original plan.

Conclusion: It is not wrong for Roxanne to delay finishing the report for Luke.

Reasoning: Roxanne promised to finish a report, but the deadline changed; this is compared to a situation where a person misses a lunch date because they suddenly became ill.

Analysis: This is an argument by analogy. The author establishes a principle using the 'lunch and illness' example: a change in circumstances can excuse someone from a prior commitment. To complete the argument, we need to apply that principle back to Roxanne. Since the deadline changed (the change in circumstance), the logical conclusion is that Roxanne is no longer strictly bound to her original promise to finish it by the initial time. Look for an answer that mirrors the 'it would not be wrong' sentiment from the lunch example.