PT 28, Section 1, question 20 & 25

ivylucky
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:53 pm

PT 28, Section 1, question 20 & 25

Postby ivylucky » Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:58 pm

I have trouble to understand why the answer for question No. 20 is A.

Also, No 25, I narrowed down to C and D.

Thanks a lot.

Shrimps
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:04 pm

Re: PT 28, Section 1, question 20 & 25

Postby Shrimps » Sun Feb 21, 2010 9:44 pm

Q20: Build the contrapositive chain. Investment is not decreasing, therefore unemployment is not rising, therefore the economy is NOT weak. Now, look for the answer choice that is FALSE, given this.

(A) right here. the economy is NOT weak, and investment is NOT decreasing, according to our conclusion above. This is the false answer.
(B) it's an "if", so it has nothing to do with our conclusion.. but it's not wrong. the premises do not make unemployment and prices dependent on each other directly.
(C) again, an "if". And it's not false.
(D) "either the economy is weak" is FALSE. We just concluded that it isn't. "Or the prices are remaining stable" - we don't know. Therefore, this isn't a wrong answer. It is possible that the prices are remaining stable.
(E) "either unemployment is rising" is FALSE. It's not rising, according to our conclusion. "Or the economy is not weak" - it's TRUE. The economy is indeed not weak. So the statement overall is true.

And yes, it's a pretty awkward and difficult question.

Shrimps
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:04 pm

Re: PT 28, Section 1, question 20 & 25

Postby Shrimps » Sun Feb 21, 2010 10:06 pm

Q25: Did you understand McKinley's argument? He said that the drug has peculiar effects (that the placebo won't have) which will be impossible not to notice. He obviously was talking about side effects (i.e. it's hard to do a double-blind placebo study if a heart disease drug gives male subjects an erection, something a placebo obviously wouldn't do.. that's how Viagra was discovered, I think). But Engle misunderstood him, thinking that McKinley is talking about the desired, intended effects of the drugs, not side effects. Even if you couldn't understand the inference, other answer choices are clearly false:

(A) is wrong. McKinley said "the most effective procedure", not "the only effective way"
(B) no. Engle did not say anything of the sort about McKinley
(C) "no effect whatever" is so strongly worded that it just screams "false". This may seem like a possibly correct answer if you didn't catch that the misunderstanding was about side effects vs. therapeutic effects, but read Engle's answer again. He merely says "you don't know what the outcome will be". He never said anything as absolute as "no effects whatever".
(D) here it is. the first answer choice that has "side effects" in it.
(E) no one was confused about "when" a drug is "efficacious".

So, the answer is D.

ivylucky
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:53 pm

Re: PT 28, Section 1, question 20 & 25

Postby ivylucky » Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:42 pm

Shrimps wrote:Q20: Build the contrapositive chain. Investment is not decreasing, therefore unemployment is not rising, therefore the economy is NOT weak. Now, look for the answer choice that is FALSE, given this.

(A) right here. the economy is NOT weak, and investment is NOT decreasing, according to our conclusion above. This is the false answer.
(B) it's an "if", so it has nothing to do with our conclusion.. but it's not wrong. the premises do not make unemployment and prices dependent on each other directly.
(C) again, an "if". And it's not false.
(D) "either the economy is weak" is FALSE. We just concluded that it isn't. "Or the prices are remaining stable" - we don't know. Therefore, this isn't a wrong answer. It is possible that the prices are remaining stable.
(E) "either unemployment is rising" is FALSE. It's not rising, according to our conclusion. "Or the economy is not weak" - it's TRUE. The economy is indeed not weak. So the statement overall is true.

And yes, it's a pretty awkward and difficult question.


Wow, it took me half of the afternoon to stare at the question. But I did not notice it asks 'must be FALSE'
Last edited by ivylucky on Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ivylucky
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:53 pm

Re: PT 28, Section 1, question 20 & 25

Postby ivylucky » Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:43 pm

Shrimps wrote:Q25: Did you understand McKinley's argument? He said that the drug has peculiar effects (that the placebo won't have) which will be impossible not to notice. He obviously was talking about side effects (i.e. it's hard to do a double-blind placebo study if a heart disease drug gives male subjects an erection, something a placebo obviously wouldn't do.. that's how Viagra was discovered, I think). But Engle misunderstood him, thinking that McKinley is talking about the desired, intended effects of the drugs, not side effects. Even if you couldn't understand the inference, other answer choices are clearly false:

(A) is wrong. McKinley said "the most effective procedure", not "the only effective way"
(B) no. Engle did not say anything of the sort about McKinley
(C) "no effect whatever" is so strongly worded that it just screams "false". This may seem like a possibly correct answer if you didn't catch that the misunderstanding was about side effects vs. therapeutic effects, but read Engle's answer again. He merely says "you don't know what the outcome will be". He never said anything as absolute as "no effects whatever".
(D) here it is. the first answer choice that has "side effects" in it.
(E) no one was confused about "when" a drug is "efficacious".

So, the answer is D.



Hmm, I admit I did not understand what Mckinley was talking about.... Thank you for your explanation.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], rat333 and 4 guests