PT76.S4.Q12 - Researcher: Research has shown that inhaling

youbbyun

I'm having trouble figuring out why A is a wrong answer choice.

If we apply the negation test to AC A, it will say -- "All of the scents that have a tendency to reduce susceptibility to illness do NOT do so by reducing stress."

Wouldn't "All of the scents" also include lavender, meaning lavender does not reduce susceptibility to illness by reducing stress? Wouldn't this wreck the argument?

Any advice or suggestions appreciated. Thank you.

Admin note: edited title
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-76-section-4-question-12/

youbbyun

just to follow up on this

IF we assume that "many" includes "one," and that the negation of "many" is "none," then the way LSAC uses "many" in answer choice A of PT 76.4.12 is INCONSISTENT. In this context, it assumes "many" is "two or more." This is HUGE, because if you assume "many" equals "one," it changes Answer choice A from a WRONG answer choice to a RIGHT answer choice.

So LSAC seems to be inconsistent with how it uses "many."

Any suggestions or advice appreciated. thank you.

youbbyun

For PT 76.4.12 -- Answer choice A - it says "Many, if not all, of the scents that have a tendency to reduce susceptibility to illness do so, at least in part, by reducing stress."

I think LSAC is interpreting "Many" here to be 2 or more. Is this because the answer choice says "scents," implying more than one?

Because if we assume that "many" includes 1, then the negation of this answer choice is "None of the scents that have a tendency to reduce susceptibility to illness do so, at least in part, by reducing stress." This would wreck the argument.

But this is Answer choice A is a WRONG answer choice.

So if we assume "many" to be 2 or more, then the negated answer choice does not wreck the argument. Negation: Other scents have no impact on stress, but lavender does.

IS this a case where LSAC is inconsistent with how it uses "many?"

I thought "many" includes 1. But here it's clear that "many" does not include 1, but is only limited to 2 or more.

Any advice or comments appreciated. thank you.

eRetaker

This is a little tricky, but you have to realize that even if the scents do not reduce susceptibility to illness, at least in part, by reducing stress, the possibility of the scent reducing susceptibility of disease by another factor (maybe chemical healing or something random) is not at all affected by the negation of answer choice A.

Now, I know you are probably wondering why I mentioned other factors when the stimulus clearly only talks about reducing stress. But read the conclusion again: "therefore, it is likely that the incidence of illness among those who regularly inhale the scent of lavender is reduced by this practice." Does the word stress comes up in that conclusion? No. Answer A was a trap by LSAC. Thus, if you negate answer A such that it says "all of the scents that have a tendency to reduce susceptibility to illness do NOT do so by reducing stress." will it really affect the conclusion that inhaling scent will lower the incidence of illness?

Answer choice B, on the other hand, clearly lays the connection of stress and illness together, making it the correct answer choice.

brigitte

OP, the LSAT is not inconsistent in how it uses many. It's just the curricula that say "many" means "some" are wrong. It doesn't mean the exact same thing as "some". Your analysis of this problem is correct - if "many" did equal "some", then (A) would be necessary. But the negation of "many" is just "not many". And that would not destroy the logic of the argument, because the argument just has to assume that lavender reduces illness by reducing stress.

youbbyun

@eRetaker

Thanks so much for following up and your thoughtful comments. I understand that the negation of A doesn't wreck the conclusion.

But it DOES wreck the support the PREMISES give to the CONCLUSION, and that's what a negated right Answer choice SHOULD do.

The MAIN reason we believe that "it is likely that the incidence of illness among those who regularly inhale the scent of lavender is reduced by this practice" is BECAUSE inhaling lavender reduces stress, and less intense stress makes one less susceptible to illness.

The negation of A wrecks ALL OF THE SUPPORT the premises give to the conclusion, thus wrecking the ARGUMENT (the relationship between premises and conclusion).

With the negation technique, we're not trying to wreck the conclusion, we're trying to wreck the Argument (which includes how the premises support the conclusion).

youbbyun

@"Cant Get Right" once stated that "[TL;DR, There are cases in which “many” does not = “some,” but those cases do not present themselves on the modern LSAT.]"

I think you may be wrong. I think this may be a instance of a Modern LSAT (PT 76) where "many" does not = "some"

Any thoughts or suggestions? Thanks.