LR help - SuperPrep A LR2 Section 4 - #20, #25 Forum

[Anaconda]

Could someone break down the stimulus and explain why the right answer is correct? LSAC's explanations for these in my opinion are lacking. Both are fairly abstract.

For #20, I don't understand the "unique to that class" part of the stimulus.

For #25, I'm having trouble comprehending how "true belief" fits into the premise that discusses trust and mutual trust.

Unfortunately I'm brain dead today for whatever reason (one of those days) so bear with me. I feel like I could stare at a wall for 8 hours straight today without bordem, so reviewing tough LR problems on my own isn't working out to well for me.

[dub]

#20: Premise: Flowers that are pollinated solely by insects -> have attractive features.
Conclusion: A flower discovered to have attractive features -> pollinated solely by insects.

The conclusion confuses sufficient and necessary conditions, although none of the answers are framed in these terms. The answer is D) because the characteristic is "having attractive features" and the class is "flowers that are pollinated by insects." If this characteristic were in fact unique to this class (meaning anything possessing this characteristic must belong to that class), then the conclusion can be properly drawn. However the author cannot freely evoke D), which is why the argument is flawed.

[Anaconda]

#25 argument basically goes as follow: X cannot be true because if X were true, society would collapse.
However, the author never establishes that things that can have negative consequences cannot be true.

#20: Premise: Flowers that are pollinated solely by insects -> have attractive features.
Conclusion: A flower discovered to have attractive features -> pollinated solely by insects.

The conclusion confuses sufficient and necessary conditions, although none of the answers are framed in these terms. The answer is D) because the characteristic is "having attractive features" and the class is "flowers that are pollinated by insects." If this characteristic were in fact unique to this class (meaning anything possessing this characteristic must belong to that class), then the conclusion can be properly drawn. However the author cannot freely evoke D), which is why the argument is flawed.

I understand 20, but 25 is still confusing. What does a "true belief" have to do with trust?

I actually got #25 right when I took this PT timed, but I got it wrong when I retook the test and misread the stimulus, and now I can't tell why A is right... ugghhh

[dub]

Ignore my explanation for #25 above. I had just woken up.

Let's try that again. True belief means "belief in something that is true." Don't place so much emphasis on the "trust" aspect, the loss is trust is a subsidiary conclusion that leads to the main conclusion.

Argument breaks down to: If we believed X to be true, bad things happen. Therefore, X cannot be true.

Let's try a parallel argument with that logic.

God's nonexistence cannot be true. Were we to believe otherwise, people would no longer feel moral obligations to one another and humanity would die out.

I hope that helps clear things up.

edit: made it more parallel.

[Anaconda]

Still not understanding the context of "true belief." Does this refer to the possibility that even if Louis is right, there could still be severe consequences as a result of his scenario and it's possible that society might collapse even if there is mutual trust among people?

[Confused&Pissed]

Still not understanding the context of "true belief." Does this refer to the possibility that even if Louis is right, there could still be severe consequences as a result of his scenario and it's possible that society might collapse even if there is mutual trust among people?

"True", I believe refers to his belief being true or realized. The whole stimulus is about what Louis believes, it is not based on some universal truth. He believes that people have to be more good than bad, because if the reverse were true bad things would happen. He ignores that it could be true, and that bad things may be a consequence, he didn't rule it out. Sorry if I confused you, and I hope I helped.

[Anaconda]

Thanks, that did help, and that's what I thought it originally meant before I started to overanalyze it. The language it uses to get that point across is so...unusual, haha.

Still not understanding the context of "true belief." Does this refer to the possibility that even if Louis is right, there could still be severe consequences as a result of his scenario and it's possible that society might collapse even if there is mutual trust among people?

"True", I believe refers to his belief being true or realized. The whole stimulus is about what Louis believes, it is not based on some universal truth. He believes that people have to be more good than bad, because if the reverse were true bad things would happen. He ignores that it could be true, and that bad things may be a consequence, he didn't rule it out. Sorry if I confused you, and I hope I helped.