PT17.S4.Q14 (P2) - legal cases can be termed "hard"

Henry An

Hello,

I came across a puzzling question while I was answering this reading comprehension question. Just to be clear, my question is more a question on formal logic than that of reading comprehension. I was wondering if the following two statements (ideas) have the same meaning.

Statement 1: Since courts cannot decide such cases on legal grounds, for its resolution, they must consider exercising judicial discretion.

Statement 2: Since courts cannot decide such cases on legal grounds, they rely for its resolution only on judicial discretion.

These two statements are statements that I edited and recreated from the passage to fit the description of my question that came across my mind regarding conditional logic (the first hybrid statement is located at lines 24 - 29 in the passage, and the second statement is a hybrid statement of answer choice D of question 14). Using conditional logic, it seems that in both cases exercising judicial discretion is the necessary condition for the resolution of the case [Statement 1 has "must" and Statement 2 has "only"]. However, just intuitively, the first statement seems to imply that while judicial discretion is necessary, there may be more. On the other hand, the second statement seems to imply that judicial discretion is THE one and only necessary condition....

Is there something I am missing? Is there maybe a subtle difference of meaning between necessary condition indicators such as "require/must/only if/etc," and the indicator of "only"?? Or is it maybe because the necessary condition for the first statement is "CONSIDERING judicial discretion" while the necessary condition for the second statement is JUST judicial discretion? They look like logical equivalents, yet they seem to imply two different things.... Any help would be great!

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-4-passage-2-passage/
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-4-passage-2-questions/

Mellow_Z

@"Henry An" said:

Statement 1: Since courts cannot decide such cases on legal grounds, for its resolution, they must consider exercising judicial discretion.

Statement 2: Since courts cannot decide such cases on legal grounds, they rely for its resolution only on judicial discretion.

Forewarning : I didn't read the passage, just your post. So my apologies if I missed something.
In these two statements, I would venture to say they aren't equivalent. Statement 1 is saying they must consider X. Statement 2 is saying they ONLY use X. But, just because someone must consider doing something, doesn't mean there is any obligation to follow through and actually do whatever it is they considered.

Example : If my doctor said "I must consider eating healthy", that doesn't stop me from going home and eating 5 bowls of ice cream. I considered eating healthy for about 2 seconds, but then I decided that ice cream sounded better.

@"Henry An" said:

Or is it maybe because the necessary condition for the first statement is "CONSIDERING judicial discretion" while the necessary condition for the second statement is JUST judicial discretion? They look like logical equivalents, yet they seem to imply two different things.... Any help would be great!

I think your logic here is circling back to the distinction I pointed out above.

Mellow_Z

It's probably also worth noting that you don't need to use conditional logic at all to answer question 14. I can't recall ever NEEDING to use conditional logic in RC to get to the right answer choice. I'm not saying that there isn't any questions in existence where you need Conditional Logic in RC, because there might be some. I can't recall one off the top of my head however.

If there was a situation of conditional logic presented to you in RC, the questions are still simply testing your understanding of the passage. You can avoid relying on the conditional logic all together by having a firm understanding of the argument structure, tone, and function of the sentence(s) that contains the logic.

Henry An

@Mellow_Z Thanks for the reply! I also agree that it is probably due to the difference in the content of the necessary condition. I actually don't quite use formal logic on RC, and it was just a question that popped in my mind that there may be there some subtle differences between different necessary condition indicators. Thank you for the help!

Mellow_Z

@"Henry An" said:
@Mellow_Z Thanks for the reply! I also agree that it is probably due to the difference in the content of the necessary condition. I actually don't quite use formal logic on RC, and it was just a question that popped in my mind that there may be there some subtle differences between different necessary condition indicators. Thank you for the help!

Yeah sorry if I inadvertently sidestepped your question, feel free to call me out on that if I did it. I'd be happy to discuss something I might have glanced over in more detail.

But you are exactly right when you say there are subtle differences in indicators. The english language is a fickle bitch, and LSAC is very good at making it even more confusing than it needs to be.