A very difficult LR question

[XJ25]

Scientist: Some critics of public funding for this research project have maintained that only if it can be indicated how the public will benefit from the project is continued public funding for it justified. If the critics were right about this, then there would not be the tremendous public support for the project that even its critics acknowledge.

If the scientist’s claims are true, which one of the following must also be true?

(A) The benefits derived from the research project are irrelevant to whether or not its funding is justified.
(B) Continued public funding for the research project is justified.
(C) Public support for the research project is the surest indication of whether or not it is justified.
(D) There is tremendous public support for the research project because it can be indicated how the public will benefit from the project.
(E) That a public benefit can be indicated is not a requirement for the justification of the research project’s continued public funding.



I actually think this is the hardest LR question and shall post the correct answer later.

[Gatorade]

can i buy an "E"?

but it sounds too much like a sucker choice, the question would not be 'hardest' if it were E......

[in my eyes]

E?

[in my eyes]

It simply isn't a requirement for the justification.

Must be true.. Can't be false.

[in my eyes]

There's continued public funding.. No indication.. Not a sucker choice


I might be downright wrong, but I'd hardly classify this as hard LR compared to a few in recent yrs

[Gatorade]

i am trying to prove to myself why D is wrong. E jumped out to me.
why did you eliminate D?

[in my eyes]

E isn't wrong

[in my eyes]

Because this is a MUST BE TRUE

Maybe there's tremendous public support because they offered to give everyone a picture of TheMongoose nude??

There could be 10000 reasons

[Justin71]

"If the critics were right about this, then there would not be the tremendous public support for the project that even its critics acknowledge. "



This means that the critics were wrong. Which means that "only if it can be indicated how the public will benefit from the project is continued public funding for it justified." is wrong. Answer E is a paraphrase of that fact.

[XJ25]

Yeah, E is the answer.

What puzzles me is not how to reach this answer, but to see the idea in writing this argument. Other than refuting the “only if” relation, the argument is so meaningless and unrealistic, i.e., while critics noted the support for a project, they subsequently claim that justifying the project requires public support for it. Don’t you think they should be called supporters instead of critics?

[Gatorade]

well, D appear to me to be irrelevant, "public support" and "public benefit" could well be has nothing to do with each other, and that's why I feel scientist's arguement is a weak one, but since it is a "must be true" question, I guess that doesn't matter.

[Justin71]

while critics noted the support for a project, they subsequently claim that justifying the project requires public support for it.

No they don't. Read closely.

[dudnaito]

the last sentence is saying that "IF the previous sentence is true," then we wouldn't have such support, but we, in fact, do have support, which means that the previous sentence is full of shit (a.k.a. answer choice E)."

[dudnaito]

can we even diagram this? i actually tried, but failed... i suck at conditional statements... and consequently life.

[Denny Crane]

...

[in my eyes]

Guys.. This isn't that hard.. No diagram.. No nonsense..

It's a MUST BE TRUE..

Look at the stim.. Look at the answer choices and pick out the fact

[stargazin]

I'm really glad I found found this website recently, because I don't get this question at all and was wondering if anyone could help me understand why the answer for this question couldn't also be B?

If answer E must be true, then answer B must be true too, in my mind. Because the only way that E could be true is if it's proven that continued public funding of a project is justified without its public benefit necessarily being indicated. So therefore this project is justified.

ie. If the project is not justified (answer B is false), then how can you prove that something is not a requirement for justification (answer E)?

Am I just totally off base?

[3|ink]

You're not allowed to blatantly post LSAT questions like this. You should edit your post ASAP.

It's E.

/Thread

[Anaconda]

I'm really glad I found found this website recently, because I don't get this question at all and was wondering if anyone could help me understand why the answer for this question couldn't also be B?

If answer E must be true, then answer B must be true too, in my mind. Because the only way that E could be true is if it's proven that continued public funding of a project is justified without its public benefit necessarily being indicated. So therefore this project is justified.

ie. If the project is not justified (answer B is false), then how can you prove that something is not a requirement for justification (answer E)?

Am I just totally off base?

The stimulus is very tricky. It's implying that despite public support, there isn't continued funding support. This matches perfectly with E.

B is incorrect because it says "some scientists think" - that certainly doesn't mean it has to be true, their beliefs were never proven in the stimulus.

[stargazin]

Thank you very much! That makes sense now. Wow. I don't think I would ever be able to get something like that on the actual test, but good to know nonetheless! 3 ink, I didn't post the question, I just saw it and had a question about the question, but if there's something I need to edit out from my own post, I'm happy to do that.

[bigben]

Code: Select all

(J --> BI) --> ~PS
PS
_____________
~(J --> BI)

[3|ink]

Thank you very much! That makes sense now. Wow. I don't think I would ever be able to get something like that on the actual test, but good to know nonetheless! 3 ink, I didn't post the question, I just saw it and had a question about the question, but if there's something I need to edit out from my own post, I'm happy to do that.

I was talking to OP. The original post includes an LSAT question. The LSAT hires people to inspect these forums and look for copyright infringement.

[bigben]

OP is 3 years old. hth.

[tkim116]

Hey, this is my first time posting on TLS, but here is the answer explained in a nut shell:

the answer must be E. The critic's claim is that PFJ --> IHPB, or pubic funding is justified only if it can be indicated how the public will benefit. But because the premises supplied by the author tell us that this is not true, we have to find a choice that effectively nullifies or refutes the critic's conclusion.

In order to refute a conclusion, you have to show that a sufficient condition can occur without a necessary condition occuring. So for our example, we have to show that PFJ can occur without IHPB occuring.

Therefore, answer choice E, which pretty much summarizes the information above (^), must be true and therefore is the correct answer.

Hope this helps.

[sayruss11]

http://www.atlaslsat.com/forums/post2804.html#p2804