PT 33 question section 1 #7

User avatar
ltowns1
Posts: 693
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 1:13 am

PT 33 question section 1 #7

Postby ltowns1 » Fri May 15, 2015 5:21 pm

Wait a minute....huh?? This is an argument???? I was looking on the Manhattan LR board, and LSAT hacks and they both say this is a argument?????? Is it because of the word "statements?? Not really following why this is an argument instead of an inference question
Last edited by ltowns1 on Fri May 15, 2015 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
giantswan
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:54 pm

Re: PT 33 question section 1 #7

Postby giantswan » Fri May 15, 2015 6:49 pm

I'm a little confused by your phrasing (maybe just because I'm not familiar with Manhattan stuff). Are you asking why the stimulus is considered an argument?

If so, it has nothing to do with the word "statements" in the question stem. It is considered an argument because there is a conclusion ("That is why...").

User avatar
ltowns1
Posts: 693
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 1:13 am

Re: PT 33 question section 1 #7

Postby ltowns1 » Fri May 15, 2015 7:01 pm

giantswan wrote:I'm a little confused by your phrasing (maybe just because I'm not familiar with Manhattan stuff). Are you asking why the stimulus is considered an argument?

If so, it has nothing to do with the word "statements" in the question stem. It is considered an argument because there is a conclusion ("That is why...").



Ok I see

User avatar
Christine (MLSAT)
Posts: 358
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:41 pm

Re: PT 33 question section 1 #7

Postby Christine (MLSAT) » Tue May 19, 2015 1:57 pm

I'd like to clarify this a little! The stimulus is an argument AND this is an inference question. Those two things are not mutually exclusive, though a lot of people think they are.

The question stem determines your task. For an 'assumption' question, you know right away that you are going to be dealing with an argument, and that you'll be finding the gap between the premise and the conclusion.

For an inference question, you're looking for something that must be true (or is extremely likely). Usually, you're inferring from a set of factual-sounding statements. Occasionally, though, you're given an argument. Now, on an inference question, you have to accept everything in the stimulus as true, right? So, if you accept an argument, that means you accept not only the premises, but also the conclusion and the reasoning used to get there as true.

And ultimately, that means that you have to accept any necessary assumptions of the argument also. If you didn't, then you couldn't possible accept the conclusion and reasoning, and you know you have to!

As a result, the correct answer on this question is both something that is very supported, if we accept the argument as valid and true, and also a 'necessary assumption' of the argument.

User avatar
ltowns1
Posts: 693
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 1:13 am

Re: PT 33 question section 1 #7

Postby ltowns1 » Tue May 19, 2015 4:28 pm

Interesting,thanks as always!!!




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, Anon.y.mousse., B-Mo, clueless801, curry4bfast, dontsaywhatyoumean, Greenteachurro, GurleyGurleyGone and 9 guests