PT79.S4.Q21 - only engineering is

nathanieljschwartz

Either my brain is fried or im thick as a rock bc i cannot put into words why C is correct.
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-79-section-4-question-21/

LSATcantwin

This stupid question. I hated it when I sat for the test and I hate it now.

The idea is that the argument is made by analogy. In order for the analogy to work, the two things being compared need to be similar right?

So he says that the notion of purpose can be assigned only by engineers, because they understand how a thing works as a whole unlike other disciplines.

He then says only physiology can determine the nature of an organs role in the healthy functioning of a body.

Well engineers use the notion of purpose to analyze a thing as a whole, so for our argument to work physiology needs something that is like the notion of purpose for the body to analyze it as a whole right?

Does it make sense? Sorta...lol best I can do.

HesusChrist

Analogies rely on their similarity. We know that engineering is uniquely suited to analyzing machines because it, unlike physics and chemistry, can express the notion of purpose.
Now, if physiology is similar in that it is specially suited to analyzing an organism (i.e. a machine), then it should have that special characteristic that makes it analogous to engineering (the notion of purposes)
Negating (C) makes it clear: The notion of purpose used by engineers to judge the notion of success has NO analog in organisms. If this were the case, the analogy would fall apart.

Not sure if that is the textbook approach, but it was how I approached it.

AllezAllez21

This is one where the negation test comes in handy. Negated, (C) says "The notion of blah blah has NO analog in organisms." If it truly has no analog, then how could the analogy stand?

nathanieljschwartz

Yeah thanks everyone. I figured it out. Such a piss off of a question. I was looking for a complicated assumption somewhere in there. And this is what i get? Ugh