Top Law Schools

I've been PTing in order up to PT 63, and I'm realizing that around PT 55, some sufficient assumption and psuedo-sufficient assumption (validating principle) questions take a slightly new form. These SA/PSA questions do not perfectly validate the argument with a simple conditional statement as did most SA/PSA questions before PT 55 (or so). In these questions, often the question stems ask for the answer choice that "most validates" (instead of simply "validates") the reasoning, and often the conclusions contain statements of probability instead of certainty (allowing the necessary amount of wiggle room for a less-than-perfect answer choice.)

I'm looking at PT 60 now, and examples include the Music Critic/Underground Success question (PT 60/Sec 3/#24) and the Invention of Money question (PT 60/Sec 1/#22), and the Libel question (PT 60/Sec 1/#23).

I'm having some difficulty with these new kinds of questions, and NEVER had any problems with the simple SA/PSA questions of the earlier tests. Does anyone else have any similar experiences or advice? Also - any other specific trends in recent questions would be appreciated.

Thanks!

Wahoos2014 wrote:I've been PTing in order up to PT 63, and I'm realizing that around PT 55, some sufficient assumption and psuedo-sufficient assumption (validating principle) questions take a slightly new form. These SA/PSA questions do not perfectly validate the argument with a simple conditional statement as did most SA/PSA questions before PT 55 (or so). In these questions, often the question stems ask for the answer choice that "most validates" (instead of simply "validates") the reasoning, and often the conclusions contain statements of probability instead of certainty (allowing the necessary amount of wiggle room for a less-than-perfect answer choice.)

I'm looking at PT 60 now, and examples include the Music Critic/Underground Success question (PT 60/Sec 3/#24) and the Invention of Money question (PT 60/Sec 1/#22), and the Libel question (PT 60/Sec 1/#23).

I'm having some difficulty with these new kinds of questions, and NEVER had any problems with the simple SA/PSA questions of the earlier tests. Does anyone else have any similar experiences or advice? Also - any other specific trends in recent questions would be appreciated.

Thanks!

Hm. I don't know—while 60.3.24 is certainly difficult, it also has an answer that definitively proves its conclusion:

There are two options here; either a band sells well or it sells poorly.

If it sells well, it may be a mark of success, or it may mean that it's just too trendy (which per (B) means it's unsuccessful).

If it sells poorly it may be a success (many musicians feel that way, per the passage), or it may mean the band is incompetent (which (B) tells us means the band's unsuccessful).

So if you add (B) to the passage, it proves that sales don't measure success—either way, you could be successful or unsuccessful. While the whole thing is more difficult, it operates in the way we're accustomed to seeing these work.



For 60.1.22, it does seem like they've inverted a premise and the right answer; if you add (A) to the argument, and then make the first sentence (say, like "All societies have money") into an answer choice, then we've got the classic setup, right? Tricky! The conditional language of the passage, coupled with the weak conclusion, could be a clue that we don't need an answer as strong as we're used to.



Now, 60.1.23 seemed straight-up standard to me:

No one will say anything bad (~B), so no one can have a good reputation (~G)

I diagram thusly:

~B

∴~G

And I can see that ~B → ~G, or contrapositive G → B, fits the blank perfectly.

I think my point is for you not to get worried! The same principles apply as have always applied, even if there are occasionally really tough questions (as we'd expect questions numbered 22-24 to be!).

I hope that helps.