PT74.S4.Q20 - economist: global recessions

SA135790

Hi everyone,

Can someone please explain why AC E is wrong? I understand why D is the correct AC but I am having trouble eliminating E, more importantly I am having trouble understanding what E is saying in the first place. Thank you!

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-74-section-4-question-20/

LSATcantwin

Okay - Flaw questions really use to be the bane of my existence because I couldn't understand what the heck the AC was saying. I had to practice breaking the AC down into simple, dumb English. Let's give this a shot with AC E.

E.) Implicitly bases an inference that something will not occur solely on the information that its occurrence is not predictable.

Time to make this dumb English.

• Implicitly bases the inference - Makes an assumption

• That something will not occur - That something wont happen

• on the information that its occurrence is not predictable - because we know it can't be predicted.

Dumb English: Makes and assumption that something wont happen because it we know it can't be predicted.

Okay well does the argument do this?

ARGUMENT:

Global recessions can't be prevented since we can only prevent them if we can predict them.
But economists consistently fail to accurately predict global recessions.

• Conclusion - Global recessions can never be prevented

• P1 - Recessions could be prevented only if they are predictable

• P2 - Economists using their best techniques fail to accurately predict global recessions.

Well he is saying that right now economists use the best tools they got, and can't predict global recessions. That's not the same thing as saying "global recessions will never happen because we know we can never predict them".

I hope this helps out a bit.