I think LSAC is Wrong. PT 58, Section 4, #9

User avatar
Posts: 3637
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: I think LSAC is Wrong. PT 58, Section 4, #9

Postby ScottRiqui » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:52 pm

Power Clean wrote:so why can't we infer that when one of those snakes hits six months with the disease it will die from it, if not sooner?

Let's say that there are a half-dozen snakes hatched in North America that have the disease. Every one of them dies before reaching six months old; three escape their cages and are eaten by other pets, two of them are accidentally starved by inattentive owners, and the sixth dies from a disease completely unrelated to the one discussed in the question.

In this case, the scenario described in answer choice 'A' never comes to pass; none of the North American snakes died as a result of the liver disease at all. That's why I agree it's a bad question, *if* LSAC considers "can properly be inferred" to be identical to "must be true".

User avatar
Posts: 2253
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:07 am

Re: I think LSAC is Wrong. PT 58, Section 4, #9

Postby appind » Mon Jun 01, 2015 12:10 am

interested in this old thread.

did op ever hear from LSAC about this question and the issue of "properly inferred"?

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bluffer0123, TedBuckland and 3 guests