Top Law Schools

Number 23 in Section 1

Why is the answer A but not C? I thought the word "express" in answer choice A made it incorrect, right?

Number 14 in Section 3

Why is this B? Why is it not C or (especially) E?

Thanks guys.

-Helicio

bump

Somebody else can weigh in on the first question and I'm having some trouble putting this second explanation into words but I think it goes something like this:


#14. Conclusion of Argument: If ~overwhelming evidence --------> accept verdict of tradition.


B). If we accept a hypothesis that goes against tradition------> Overwhelming evidence.

CONTRAPOSITIVE: ~ overwhelming evidence -------> ~accept a hypothesis that goes against tradition.

More accurately the sufficient condition can be stated as: accept a hypothesis that goes WITH tradition.


I think C is wrong because the argument is really only addressing what the outcome ought to be if we don't have enough evidence AGAINST a claim. It says nothing of the requirements of evidence we ought to have FOR a claim/hypothesis.


I think E is wrong because the principle stated in the answer choice requires two hypothesis to conflict with tradition. However, the principle applied in the argument could have very well been applied with only one hypothesis in conflict with the traditional hypothesis.


I think that explanation about sums it up but I'm interested to hear some other viewpoints as well.

There's a discussion of both problems here. Hope that's helpful...

Thanks guys.