PT21-S3-Q6- Books about architectural works

miriaml7miriaml7 Live Member
edited September 2020 in Logical Reasoning 1025 karma

I noticed that for this question we are being presented with a principle in the stimulus. The principle used conditional logic:

Intended General Audience ------> book has to discuss aesthetics and utility

In order for the conclusion to be true, the principle has to then be "activated." In order for that to happen you must either 1. satisfy the sufficient or 2. negate the necessary. The answer choice ended up satisfying this sufficient.

This isn't the first NA question that I have seen structured this way. I am not sure if this is an observation worth noting for future NA questions. I have only done a handful of NA questions so far, so I would definitely appreciate some insight.

Also, if there is a flaw in my reasoning I would really appreciate the feedback:)

Thanks in advance!

Admin Note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-21-section-3-question-06/

Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • hopefullinghopefulling Member
    edited September 2020 905 karma

    I translated this roughly as:
    IF (for architects) --> (discusses function AND aesthetics)
    IF (not flawed) --> (discusses function and aesthetics) OR (intended for general audience)

    I think the principle nature is context to the story within the stimulus. I saw this question more as acting to defend the conclusion that the book is flawed. And in a weird way, almost written Evaluate-ish additionally. Setting up the 'either A or B'/not both whereas the book is either intended for a general audience or for a non-general audience (ie: for architects). And then, with the book failing to discuss aesthetics, in order to defend the conclusion that the book is flawed, we have to rule out the possibility that the book was intended for a general audience. Because, if the conclusion is true, then it must be the case that the book was intended for a non-general audience (ie: for architects). If the book is intended for a general audience, the conclusion fails: the book is not flawed (the book DIDN'T have to discuss utility/function OR aesthetics/the beautiful ceiling). In the conditional, the sufficient wouldn't be activated/would be dormant.

Sign In or Register to comment.