skip james wrote:Woozy wrote:That is a good and detailed write-up. There is only one problem I saw which the author may wish to correct:Ken wrote:10. A greater proportion of high school students these days are lazy compared with earlier generations. Industriousness is both necessary and sufficient for academic success, and lazy students are never industrious.
Which of the following can be properly concluded, assuming the statements above are true:
(A) Blah blah blah
(B) Yada yada yada
(C) A greater proportion of high school students these days will find it impossible to succeed academically.
(D) A smaller proportion of students are industrious these days than in earlier generations.
(E) More high school students these days will not succeed in life.
Since this is question number 10 it’s still relatively easy, so we were able to quickly narrow the choices down to two. Yet, because it’s question 10, and we’re trying to finish the first ten in ten minutes, we’re moving quickly and may miss a key word or two. At first glance, D may actually appear more correct than C because its language isn’t as “strong” and it requires fewer logical steps, but I hope you noticed that D is talking about all students. C correctly limits itself to high school students.
The general point of this passage is useful, but it immediately struck me that C cannot be properly inferred from the stimulus. We don't know the incidence of industriousness among non-lazy students so we cannot conclude that the population as a whole has a lower incidence of industriousness. If the last sentence were changed to read that a student is not industrious if and only if he is lazy, this problem would be solved.
i don't think that actually solves the problem. i think there's a problem in the fact that 'being lazier compared to earlier generations' doesn't necessarily entail being 'a lazy student'.
here's a parallel argument where what im talking about may be more evident:
the majority of the lakers these days are worse at dunking than the lakers of earlier years. one can succeed academically if and only if they are industrious. people who are bad at dunking aren't industrious.
I don't see it that way. In his example, I read lazy as a binary condition. You are either lazy or not lazy. And a higher proportion of students are now lazy. I'd change your example to:
A higher percentage of the lakers these days are bad at dunking than the lakers of earlier years. One can succeed academically if and only if they are industrious. people who are bad at dunking aren't industrious.