PT 62 section 2 #16 (Seeking input)
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 10:05 am
Premise:
Snoring-->Serious abnormalities
Conclusion:
Snoring causes damage
I see the correlation to causation fallacy (now), but when I was doing this under timed conditions that seemed like a slight equivocation. After seeing the "E" was the answer: Abnormalities do not cause snoring(thereby strengthening by removing alternate cause), I realized that I should have looked more critically at this.
Is this the gist of the problem, did I just miss that "serious abnormalities" and "damage" are equivalent terms or is there more to it?
LSAT minds greater than mine please feel free to chime in...
Snoring-->Serious abnormalities
Conclusion:
Snoring causes damage
I see the correlation to causation fallacy (now), but when I was doing this under timed conditions that seemed like a slight equivocation. After seeing the "E" was the answer: Abnormalities do not cause snoring(thereby strengthening by removing alternate cause), I realized that I should have looked more critically at this.
Is this the gist of the problem, did I just miss that "serious abnormalities" and "damage" are equivalent terms or is there more to it?
LSAT minds greater than mine please feel free to chime in...