PT 72.S3.Q6 - Astrophysicist: Gamma ray bursts (GRBs)—explosions

foxtrot96

it is a strengthening question where the conclusion is that descriptive labels have outlived their usefulness.

Because an unusual Grb was sighted that had properties of both.

My issue with the correct ans choice is that the argument says that the unusual GRB had all properties of Short GRB in every other respect other than duration. So if take the ans choice to be true, then other properties would be more important in classification however in that case since we know from stimulus that all other properties were that of a short Grb then we could easily classify the unusual Grb to be a short one.

so i dont see how this strengthens the conclusion for us. In a way i suppose it weakens the argument at best. Could somebody let me know where i am going wrong ?

i can see how others are wrong but cant see how C is correct.

Admin note: edited title
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-3-question-06/

astrowise

Yes, that is what the argument is saying, it should be classified with the 'short' GRBs, but not labeled 'short'. The stimulus states that the GRB's duration is long, but it has properties of a short GRB, thus the labels 'short' and 'long' are bad. The specific GRB is similar to other 'short' GRBs except in duration, so they should be labeled not 'short' GRBs but rather a different category representing other properties alluded to in (C)