PT44.S2.Q12 - Experts hired to testify in court

youbbyun

can someone provide an answer explanation?

really confused between answer choice A and answer choice C.

how i view it - stimulus has 2 things it's comparing: skill/knowledge and persuasion. persuasion is emphasized/prioritized, so someone with less skill but more persuasion is preferred.

It's very hard for me to see this fit AC A (the correct AC).

I guess i can say that 2 things compared: highly skilled at conducting an election campaign and have insight into important political issues. What's preferred is the latter, so successful politicians are "not always ones who understand how to help country?"

not sure if this makes sense. help would be appreciated - thanks!!

Admin note: edited title
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-44-section-2-question-12/

NotMyName

Can you check the question PT/S/# again? 43.2.12 is about the Earth being flat.

youbbyun

@NotMyName sorry! i meant PT 44!

NotMyName

Can you map out the analogous ideas as your see them for ACs A and C? So in other words, you pointed to "knowledge" and "persuasion" in the stimulus and correctly stated that sometimes, folks with "persuasion" are preferred despite not having the most "knowledge". So in ACs A and C, which ideas map to "persuasion" and "knowledge"?

EvetteCee

The stimulus tells us in order to get hired to testify you need:
P1. Know how to make convincing presentations
P2. Able to present steps clearly and confidently

C: some less expert authorities with convincing testimony testify rather than the skilled but less persuasive experts.

So, the principle is: sometimes the most skilled (A) person isn't selected, but rather the persuasive (B) one.

AC A conforms to this principle because it's basically saying that successful politicians can be seen as successful not because they know how to help their country (A -- not the most skilled), but because they know how to conduct an election campaign (B -- they are persuasive).

NotMyName

Boom. Why do you our help??