Top Law Schools

Prep 22, Section 2 #18

Why would E not suffice as an answer?
Also I find it sorta difficult to spot that B is an answer.

B works because it states that the work is original but not far-reaching, so it's not great, as it lacks a characteristic stated in the premise for greatness. E introduces a new characteristic for greatness that is not stated in the premise, broad-appeal.

What CyanIdes said. I diagrammed it like this:

TG---->O & FI

The contrapositive would be ~O or ~FI----->~TG

The Contrapositive is exactly what answer choice B says.

E introduces a new condition.

E is wrong because it introduces a 3rd necessary condition is not proven by the principle in the stim.

Here's a tip for principle questions: If the stim has a principle structured somewhat as "A always has B and C" or similarly "To be A, one must have B and C"...one could instantly predict that the answer has to be in the contrapositive form of the principle...because an answer choice that structured to say "This has B and C. So it must be A" is going against the logic chain; now a correct answer choice could say "We have A. So we must also have B and C," but that is almost never an option for us as an answer choice.

That might have sounded somewhat confusing...