PT23.S2.Q14 - kim: in northern europe during the 18th century

Cecilia Z

Hey everyone!

I'm pretty confused about this question. Could anyone speak more on why (C) is incorrect? I chose it because I thought it was blocking out an alternative cause to the cited change in attitude: philosophers spreading their ideas to the public.

Also, how exactly does (A) strengthen Kim's conclusion? Couldn't really follow what JY was saying!

Here's the link to the question! https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-2-question-14/

Thank you!

Laabradir33

Never had experience helping others in problems but let me try

Kim says argument "increase of life expectancy makes attitude more optimistic"
Lee says counterargument saying that what Kim said(increase of life expectancy makes attitude more optimistic) could have happened only if some other factor(awareness of life expectancy) was there.

a.k.a without that factor(awareness), there's no way what Kim said happened.
a.k.a in order for what Kim said to happen, that factor MUST have been there.

Answer(A) rejects Lee's counterargument by showing that factor DOESN'T have to be there in order for what Kim said to happen.

(A) Increase of life expectancy itself, without people necessarily being aware, affects the economy and ends up influencing people's attitude.

and shows that people Dont Have to be Aware that their life expectancy increased in order for it(increase of life expectancy makes attitude more optimistic) to have happened.

(C) doesn't provide any defense against Lee's (counterargument)