Self-study
I was reviewing Q19 from Section 1 of PT 27 answer choice A, which got me wondering about causal chains.
According to the stimulus, pollen can cause the release of histamines, and histamine cannot cause cold symptoms.
Answer A says: "Pollen and other allergens do not cause colds" and it is an incorrect answer.
Can we not link this up into a causal chain like "pollen --> histamine --> ~cold symptoms" and conclude (through the transitive property) that pollen cannot cause cold symptoms?
I know for conditional reasoning, if you have a chain like "a-->b-->~c" you can conclude "a-->~c", but is this not the case for causal reasoning?
In a similar vein, if you have a causal chain like "a causes b. b causes c", you CAN conclude that "a causes c," right?...
Thank you!
The consultants show great willingness to help and really put in the effort to answer all your questions/comments as quickly as possible. They will always be there for you! As the first in my family to go to law school, I was so unsure about everything from which schools I should apply to to writing continuing letters of interest to negotiating scholarships. My consultants looked at my numbers and were able to find the perfect strategy (ie. which schools I should set as my "target," "safety," and "reach") for me. They know the ins and outs of law school admissions, which was perfect for someone like me who knew almost nothing. They are really honest about this too---they don't try to sugarcoat anything but rather give you a realistic picture of what you can and probably cannot achieve. I got into my dream school, and I think a large part of it was because of this strategy. I'm about to enter the scholarship negotiation phase, and I'm sure that they'll be very helpful in this area as well!