PT36.S1.Q22 - Any writer whose purpose is personal expression

GreatDay8GreatDay8 Alum Member
edited October 2018 in Logical Reasoning 130 karma

Admin note: Deleted. Please don't post the actual question

Translated:

Poet --> Purpose PE Ambig. Words

Thus.

Poetry Reader --> not the case [enjoyment depends on precise understanding of what poet means]

Correct Answer Choice (C): Admin note: Deleted.

Translated:

If writer that uses words ambiguously --> not the case [have any reader whose enjoyment depends on precise understanding of what the writer means]

My issue is rooted in what appears to be a correct answer choice based on the question's invalid argument form:

A --> B C

A C

In short, in implying that poet's use ambiguous words - is that not an invalid assumption? The purpose of all poets is personal expression & if you are a writer whose purpose is personal expression then you sometimes use words ambiguously. This statement does not necessarily mean that all poets use words ambiguously. It may be the case. It may not be. But I think answer choice C would only make sense if the stimulus was structured like: The purpose of all poets is personal expression & if you are a writer whose purpose is personal expression then you always use words ambiguously.

Does anyone else catch my train of thought?

Admin note: edited title
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-36-section-1-question-22/

Comments

  • SamiSami Yearly + Live Member Sage ⭐ 7Sage Tutor
    edited October 2018 10806 karma

    @GreatDay8 said:
    In short, in implying that poet's use ambiguous words - is that not an invalid assumption? The purpose of all poets is personal expression & if you are a writer whose purpose is personal expression then you sometimes use words ambiguously. This statement does not necessarily mean that all poets use words ambiguously.

    It does mean- All poets sometimes use words ambiguously. (An inference I think you do see).
    I think you are confusing the difference between "some poets use words ambiguously" versus "all poets sometimes use words ambiguously". The first one implies that at least some of them do and in that case you would be correct to say that it does not necessarily mean that all poets use words ambiguously. But there is a difference when the inference is: all poets sometimes use words ambiguously. It does mean that all poets sometimes during their work use words ambiguously. Not necessarily all the time but some time they all do it.

    That's why answer choice "C" makes sense. It doesn't say all writers who always use words ambiguously; it instead says, No writer who ever uses words ambiguously. By saying "ever", it includes the poets this stimulus is talking about -the ones who sometimes use words ambiguously.

    I hope this helped.

  • hosny.yhmhosny.yhm Free Trial Member
    edited May 2019 26 karma

    When it says 'Any writer whose purpose is personal expression sometimes uses words ambiguously' I thought the lawgic translates to Writers --sometimes--> uses words ambiguously.

    Apparently, it translates to Writers ----> uses words ambiguously

    Can someone explain to me why I'm wrong? I thought "sometimes" means "some"

  • BlindReviewerBlindReviewer Alum Member
    855 karma

    @"hosny.yhm" you're not wrong, but the reason the answer is over-inclusive with "ever uses words ambiguously" instead of "sometimes" is because this is a sufficient assumption question and not a necessary assumption.

  • hosny.yhmhosny.yhm Free Trial Member
    26 karma

    @BlindReviewer said:
    @"hosny.yhm" you're not wrong, but the reason the answer is over-inclusive with "ever uses words ambiguously" instead of "sometimes" is because this is a sufficient assumption question and not a necessary assumption.

    Thank you. But, I still am having a hard time understanding. Are you telling me that if I see "A" sometimes "B", it means If "A" then "B" in Sufficient Assumption questions? Why is that so?

  • SamiSami Yearly + Live Member Sage ⭐ 7Sage Tutor
    10806 karma

    @"hosny.yhm" said:

    @BlindReviewer said:
    @"hosny.yhm" you're not wrong, but the reason the answer is over-inclusive with "ever uses words ambiguously" instead of "sometimes" is because this is a sufficient assumption question and not a necessary assumption.

    Thank you. But, I still am having a hard time understanding. Are you telling me that if I see "A" sometimes "B", it means If "A" then "B" in Sufficient Assumption questions? Why is that so?

    I know the question you posted isn't for me, but I hope maybe my explanation can be helpful to you.

    In the stimulus the LSAT writers are using grammar a way that I think may be making you equate "All A's sometimes do B" to "A some B". I think a good way to see the difference would be through an simpler analogy:

    1. Some Birds Fly.
      The noun in this sentence is "some birds". Because "some" has a range of 1 to 100, we can only conclude from the first sentence that at least one bird can fly. This sentence means at least 1 bird, maybe all, can fly. But its possible that some of the birds don't fly.

    2. All birds sometimes fly.
      The noun here is "All birds". Which means we can conclude whatever follows about all birds.It means I can conclude that all birds at one point will fly. Additionally, I can also conclude that there is no bird that can never fly.

    I hope this helps you see the difference. While in one sentence "some" is being used as a modifier to the noun - "Some birds". In the second sentence, "some" is being used as a predicate to the noun "all birds".

    So based on that, our sentence "All writers sometimes use words ambiguously". The noun is "All writers". So the sentence means that we can conclude that every writer will at some point use words ambiguously.

    I hope this helped.

  • hosny.yhmhosny.yhm Free Trial Member
    26 karma

    @Sami said:

    @"hosny.yhm" said:

    @BlindReviewer said:
    @"hosny.yhm" you're not wrong, but the reason the answer is over-inclusive with "ever uses words ambiguously" instead of "sometimes" is because this is a sufficient assumption question and not a necessary assumption.

    Thank you. But, I still am having a hard time understanding. Are you telling me that if I see "A" sometimes "B", it means If "A" then "B" in Sufficient Assumption questions? Why is that so?

    I know the question you posted isn't for me, but I hope maybe my explanation can be helpful to you.

    In the stimulus the LSAT writers are using grammar a way that I think may be making you equate "All A's sometimes do B" to "A some B". I think a good way to see the difference would be through an simpler analogy:

    1. Some Birds Fly.
      The noun in this sentence is "some birds". Because "some" has a range of 1 to 100, we can only conclude from the first sentence that at least one bird can fly. This sentence means at least 1 bird, maybe all, can fly. But its possible that some of the birds don't fly.

    2. All birds sometimes fly.
      The noun here is "All birds". Which means we can conclude whatever follows about all birds.It means I can conclude that all birds at one point will fly. Additionally, I can also conclude that there is no bird that can never fly.

    I hope this helps you see the difference. While in one sentence "some" is being used as a modifier to the noun - "Some birds". In the second sentence, "some" is being used as a predicate to the noun "all birds".

    So based on that, our sentence "All writers sometimes use words ambiguously". The noun is "All writers". So the sentence means that we can conclude that every writer will at some point use words ambiguously.

    I hope this helped.

    THANK YOU. This helped me a lot!

  • SamiSami Yearly + Live Member Sage ⭐ 7Sage Tutor
    10806 karma

    @"hosny.yhm" said:

    THANK YOU. This helped me a lot!

    Great! I am happy it helped. :)

Sign In or Register to comment.