Discussion
If the teacher's statements are true, which of the following can be concluded?
*This question is included in Exercise Set 2: Intro to Negation, question #9
| (A) | There was pressure inside the container. |
| (B) | ... |
| (C) | ... |
| (D) | ... |
| (E) | ... |
| (F) | ... |
The solution is
Posted: 08/02/2011 14:44
How do you know that the explosion was caused by the pressure? It is not stated that by putting in mentos you will get great pressure in the bottle, and you cannot conclude that all explosions are caused by great pressure. It simply said that if there is not enough pressure that you will not get an explosion. But that is not the same as saying that an explosion is caused by great pressure, is it?
Posted: 08/02/2011 22:40
Sometimes LSAT passages will seem more like word games than actual arguments. With that in mind, we designed our "Exercise" passages to read like word games as well.
The correct answer is not "an explosion was caused by great pressure". The correct answer is that there was "great pressure". You're right that you can't conclude that the great pressure CAUSED the explosion.
Here's what we know:
P 1: ~Prs Grt → ~SGW → ~E
P 2: M in C
P 3: E
So let's take the contrapositive of "P 1". This give us:
E → SGW → Prs Grt
And by the last premise ("P 3"), we know that we have "E" (an explosion). So we have:
P: "E → SGW → Prs Grt"
P: "E"
C: Therefore, "Prs Grt".
If this seems weird or nit-picky, try not to get too annoyed. Some of the more difficult LSAT questions you will encounter depend on a similarly particular use of language. These
Exercise Sets are simply intended to prepare you for those questions.
Feel free to let us know what you think of this response--and of our Exercise Sets in general--by leaving another comment.
- Arcadia
The correct answer is not "an explosion was caused by great pressure". The correct answer is that there was "great pressure". You're right that you can't conclude that the great pressure CAUSED the explosion.
Here's what we know:
P 1: ~Prs Grt → ~SGW → ~E
P 2: M in C
P 3: E
So let's take the contrapositive of "P 1". This give us:
E → SGW → Prs Grt
And by the last premise ("P 3"), we know that we have "E" (an explosion). So we have:
P: "E → SGW → Prs Grt"
P: "E"
C: Therefore, "Prs Grt".
If this seems weird or nit-picky, try not to get too annoyed. Some of the more difficult LSAT questions you will encounter depend on a similarly particular use of language. These
Exercise Sets are simply intended to prepare you for those questions.
Feel free to let us know what you think of this response--and of our Exercise Sets in general--by leaving another comment.
- Arcadia
Posted: 10/01/2011 16:09
"great pressure" is subjective and may not even be coterminous with pressure sufficient to explode a bottle. The only formally correct answer is D
Posted: 10/01/2011 16:09
Sorry I meant to write E there
Posted: 10/21/2011 20:44
You cant conclude that GREAT pressure existed. Only that there was enough pressure to explode the bottle.
Posted: 10/22/2011 13:55
Alec & Michael,
We've taken another look at the passage in light of your comments.
You're both correct. The passage doesn't allow for you to conclude that "great" pressure built up in the bottle. We'll make some edits to the passage. Look for the updated text in the next update.
As always, thank you for your feedback.
We've taken another look at the passage in light of your comments.
You're both correct. The passage doesn't allow for you to conclude that "great" pressure built up in the bottle. We'll make some edits to the passage. Look for the updated text in the next update.
As always, thank you for your feedback.