I really struggle on sufficient assumption questions. I am scoring 170+ on my preptests, but I cringe when I see a sufficient assumption question. On a question like this one, I really leaned towards not diagramming it. I mean I gathered that it is essentially:
Premise: If SB on planets outside solar system --- > ~Determine
Premise: ~Spacecraft
Premise: SB on another planet capable of communicating in the near future ---> at least as intelligent as humans
Conlcusion:
Determine ---> SB at least as intelligent as humans
I also took notice of the varying phrases in the stimulus, going from planets outside our solar system, to later on saying another planet, regardless of whether or not it is in our solar system.
The correct answer is D.
December 2010, Section 4, LR, #18 "Sentient Beings" Forum
-
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:26 pm
December 2010, Section 4, LR, #18 "Sentient Beings"
Last edited by secretad on Sat May 28, 2011 10:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- 510Chicken
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:50 pm
Re: December 2010, Section 4, LR, #18 "Sentient Beings"
This can be written as:secretad wrote: D) If a sentient being on another planet cannot communicate with us, then the only way to detect its existence is by ending a spacecraft to its planet.
D --> (C v S) (D = Detect/Determine; C = Communicate; S = Spacecraft)
Since ~S is given:
D --> C
C --> I (I = Intelligent) (Given)
So:
D --> C --> I
D --> I
Which, incidentally, is the conclusion you're looking for.
(or alternatively, ~I --> ~C --> ~D)
- lakers3peat
- Posts: 464
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:10 pm
Re: December 2010, Section 4, LR, #18 "Sentient Beings"
This can be written as:510Chicken wrote: D) If a sentient being on another planet cannot communicate with us, then the only way to detect its existence is by ending a spacecraft to its planet.
D --> (C v S) (D = Detect/Determine; C = Communicate; S = Spacecraft)
Since ~S is given:
D --> C
)[/quote]
Is that really inferrable? Jeez I had so much trouble with this question; I thought I had my formal logic down but I guess I dont
Op: you might want to revise your post to remove the infringement, at least paraphrase