PT66.S4.Q14 - research universities have an obligation

Cecilia ZCecilia Z Member
edited September 2017 in Logical Reasoning 144 karma

link to JY's explanation video: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-66-section-4-question-14/

Hey guys,

This is a PSA question that I'm having difficulty with. I can't seem to understand why A is not correct. What is it about the language here that fails to make this the contrapositive of the principle? I understood A to read: "A uni denies a grant application... because the math puzzle has no practical concerns. But isn't this exactly the contrapositive? Aren't we justifying the action "denying the application" (which equates to NOT promoting research, back in the principle's language) specifically because of the math puzzle's impracticality?

That being said, I clearly see that (E) is the correct answer. But during the PT, I was confident A was the contrapositive, chose it, and moved on without glancing at E. A hard lesson that I'll be learning from for sure.

Thanks!

Comments

  • AllezAllez21AllezAllez21 Member Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐
    1917 karma

    The stimulus is diagrammed as follows:

    Promise of yielding insights into practical problems (X) → obligation to promote (Y)

    or contra-positively: No obligation to promote → no promise of practical insights.

    Answer choice A talked about something that has no relation to practicality. So it fails our sufficient condition (X). When we fail a sufficient condition, no valid inference can be drawn. Looking at the contrapositive, you can say that we satisfied the necessary condition, from which no valid inferences can be made.

    From a more intuitive perspective, the stimulus gives us direction for when we do have an obligation to promote something. It does not talk about when it is appropriate to deny an action.

Sign In or Register to comment.