PT44 section 2 question 13

nickbentley
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:21 pm

PT44 section 2 question 13

Postby nickbentley » Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:41 am

Will someone explain this to me? I don't understand how choice A is correct?

dakatz
Posts: 2460
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:19 pm

Re: PT44 section 2 question 13

Postby dakatz » Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:42 am

I don't have the test, but if you PM me the question, I'd be happy to help (assuming this is a LR question)

User avatar
yzero1
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: PT44 section 2 question 13

Postby yzero1 » Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:45 am

I actually just posted my solution to this problem in another thread, so I'm going to copy and paste:

The key to this question is to link "serious ecological problems" with "government mismanagement". The diagram for the info given in the stimulus is this (everything applies to environmental problems):

-(negative) Government mismanagement -> major changes consumer -> economically enticing

The problem with the conclusion is that it doesn't rule out the possibility that a majority/possibly all of those few serious ecological problems mentioned in the conclusion ARE the result of government mismanagement. If this is true, then the conclusion doesn't follow because the conditional chain wouldn't apply. Remember, the argument only applies to ecological problems that are not the result of government mismanagement. If, let's say, 99% of serious ecological problems are the result of government mismanagement, then only 1% of these problems would require economically enticing changes. We can't say how many of the other 99% require economically enticing solutions because the other 99% are not covered by the argument. Thus, we can't say that few of the serious ecological problems would be solved without economically enticing solutions, because for all we know, a large proportion of them COULD be solved without economically enticing solutions.

However, if we assume A, then the ecological problems fits into the conditional chain and the conclusion follows. A sample diagram follows:

"Serious ecological problems -(Few)> government mismanagement" translates to "serious ecological problems -(many/most)> - government mismanagement"

This creates this chain:

Serious ecological problems -(many/most)> - government mismanagement -> major changes consumer -> economically enticing , which justifies the conclusion.

Sandro
Posts: 2526
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:12 am

Re: PT44 section 2 question 13

Postby Sandro » Mon Aug 09, 2010 5:08 pm

tough question I agree.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 180orDie, batlaw, BobBoblaw, SunDevil14, ThatOneAfrican and 13 guests