PT24.S3.Q4 - the greek alphabet must have been invented

Darklord

Hi everyone,

I am still quite confused about why answer choice D is wrong here. After all, couldn't it be argued that P is proposing a hypothesis (that M's hypothesis is laughable) and showing that it is merely possible (by stating that it is possible that a person who knew the epics well enough to write them down would not need to read them nor would anybody else be able to read them)?

In a sense, why does P's counterargument not count as a hypothesis?

help

Thanks!

Admin note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-24-section-3-question-04/

Markmark

Here there are 2 reasons D is wrong. 1, it's a stretch to say P's conclusion is a hypothesis. Technically it is a conclusion supported by premises, but typically the LSAT won't call every conclusion a hypothesis. In the explanation video JY doesn't even consider P's conclusion to be a hypothesis. I haven't seen the LSAT use the term hypothesis to refer to 2 people's conclusions without clarity, I don't think they do that.

1. This is hard to put into words, but D is descriptively wrong. P is not trying to demonstrate the truth of a hypothesis by showing its
   existence is possible; P is denying M's conclusion by questioning the purpose of writing down epics and by falsely assuming that an oral-tradition-based community can't read.

An example of what D is saying would be "Darklord is going to get a 180 on the next LSAT; he did it once at home." this is supporting a conclusion on the basis of it being existentially feasible. The mere fact something can happen doesn't mean it will, or that there's even a remote chance. Does this help? Also doing a TON of method of reasoning questions helps a lot.

Darklord

Ok thanks that helped!