PT 62- sentient beings wtf

User avatar
05062014
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:05 pm

PT 62- sentient beings wtf

Postby 05062014 » Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:54 pm

Okay I am hoping I know wtf is going on with this question.
The conclusion introduces: A (we discover sentient beings exist) --> C (Sentient Beings =Human Intel).

There is a premise: B(Sentient beings communicate with us)-->C (Sentient Beings = Human Intel)

There is a fact: No spaceship.

Is the key to this problem just figuring out a way to make A (we discover SB exist) flow towards C (Sentient Beings = Human Intelligence)? ...Even if I don't get wtf this argument is saying is that all I need to do for questions similar to these?

If so, is the correct answer choice requiring us to do something of this sort ------------ ~B(NOT Sentient beings communicate with us) --> ~A[(NO SPACESHIP -->(we CANT discover SB exist)

Making it ( A-->B-->C) Therefore: A-->C. If this is what we are doing here, why doesn't A in the conclusion match up to variable A in the answer choice? Why does it not say -- (we discover SB exist --> Spaceship) --> Sentient beings are intelligent as we are.

goodnight

User avatar
05062014
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:05 pm

Re: PT 62- sentient beings wtf

Postby 05062014 » Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:58 pm

actually, wait got it, lol.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Monday, Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests