Premise vs Intermediate Conclusion?

ioannisk
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:38 am

Premise vs Intermediate Conclusion?

Postby ioannisk » Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:27 am

Hi all,
I have difficulty deciding if a premise is just that, a premise OR a intermediate conclusion.
For example, I'm going through the manhattan lsat book for review on page 94.
The question is from PT24, S2, Q21.

One of the premises state that laws against gambling can't be enforced. I take that as a premise because that sounds like a fact.

Then, the next premise states "Ineffective laws should not be laws."
It concludes that "there shoudl be no laws against gambling."

Now, the second premise "Ineffective laws should not be laws." sounds like an intermediate conclusion for me, because it is an opinion. in my mind, a fact tends to be a premise and if theres an opinion, it's somesort of conclusion that is vulenerable to logical faults.
Manhattan Lsat lists it as a complementary premise? Why? What decides something is just another premise or a intermidate conclusion?

User avatar
Wrong Marx
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2013 5:25 pm

Re: Premise vs Intermediate Conclusion?

Postby Wrong Marx » Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:39 am

"Sounds like a fact" and "sounds like an opinion" are not valid reasons for determining whether a statement functions as a premise or a conclusion.

There should be no gambling laws.

Why?

Because ineffective laws should not be laws.
+
Gambling laws cannot be enforced.

Assumption: laws that cannot be enforced are not effective.


Try asking "why?" After a statement you are not sure about. That can help you understand the structure of the argument.

In this case, there is no answer to "why should ineffective laws not be laws?" So, it is not supported by anything. Hence, not a conclusion.

ioannisk
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:38 am

Re: Premise vs Intermediate Conclusion?

Postby ioannisk » Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:44 am

Wrong Marx wrote:"Sounds like a fact" and "sounds like an opinion" are not valid reasons for determining whether a statement functions as a premise or a conclusion.

There should be no gambling laws.

Why?

Because ineffective laws should not be laws.
+
Gambling laws cannot be enforced.

Assumption: laws that cannot be enforced are not effective.


Try asking "why?" After a statement you are not sure about. That can help you understand the structure of the argument.

In this case, there is no anser to "why should ineffective laws not be laws?" So, it is not supported by anything. Hence, not a conclusion.

Thanks you

By the way, i'm open to more strategies/thinking processes in order to figure out what's a premise or intermediate conclusion

bp shinners
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: Premise vs Intermediate Conclusion?

Postby bp shinners » Thu Nov 21, 2013 2:44 pm

Wrong Marx wrote:"Sounds like a fact" and "sounds like an opinion" are not valid reasons for determining whether a statement functions as a premise or a conclusion.


It's not a sole determinative factor, but it's definitely something you can use to help you decide if it's a conclusion or a premise.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, Baidu [Spider], Bob loblaw law blog, CHyde, lnsl123, Tazewell, The_Pluviophile, Yahoo [Bot] and 18 guests