Premise 1: New product lines need good managers to succeed.
Premise 2: However, companies tend to assign good managers only to established product lines that are already successful, and most new ones fail because of this.
Conclusion: Therefore, …
If A-most-B > C > D, then A-most-D is a perfectly valid conclusion to make, as is A-most-C.
Whoever said/voted otherwise needs to review this lesson: https://7sage.com/lesson/most-before-all-formal-argument-5/
The economist's "proposition" is essentially this:
"Having incentive X is worse than not having incentive X, because having incentive X leads to a scenario where each individual tries to get more for themselves, and everyone gets screwed over as a …
Yeah, I think A is incorrect for the exact reason you stated. The author isn't trying to refute the journalists' claim that they're doing what they're doing to improve society. If the author's objective was to refute that claim, they would have said…
Oof, this one's brutal.
So, the pro-nuclear crowd is asking the anti-nuclear crowd to "live up to their own ideals" and help come up with better ways to dispose of nuclear waste. The author claims this is a dishonest act. How?
According to the aut…
Generally, we're supposed to take premises at face value, yes. We're not rejecting a premise here, though; we're just pointing out that said premise does nothing to support the author's conclusion. Why not? Because it's phrased in a way that assumes…
I can certainly see why you would say that! But once you break down the logic of D and E, the difference should become clear:
(D) Museum will exceed budget if it renovates.
R > E
(E) Museum will not exceed budget if it does not renovate.
/R &…
Yeah, I would try not to let parental pressure influence your study/testing schedule too much. Only you can really know if the time's right for you to take the LSAT. Take it once you feel that you're ready and no sooner.
That's exactly right. Here's a simpler example of this kind of relationship:
"A is no larger than B."
So, if A isn't larger than B, then that leaves two other possibilities: A is either the same size as B, or A is smaller than B.
I think you're misinterpreting B - it actually says that it'd be cheaper to give up consistency than flavor. The main issue with B, as you've probably already figured out, is that it contradicts the stimulus: From what the stimulus tells us, it woul…
A is out of scope. There's nothing we can infer about old people in general from Rotelle's criticism of Sims.
D, on the other hand, follows logically. If Rotelle thinks Sims is too old to effectively address the country's issues, then clearly someo…
@claremont,
Ah. Now that I think about it, you're absolutely right. You're saying that (A) doesn't say that Jennifer didn't USE two weeks, but rather that she had at least two weeks that were UNUSED. I guess that'd be consistent with my illustratio…
Let me clarify, @claremont.
I agree 100% that J would have to have banked at least two weeks of vacation from last year to be able to earn the extra week she needed for her four-week vacation with her family this year. What I'm saying is, she could…
@"Matt Sorr" Yeah, if we assume J only had 3 available vacation weeks the previous year, then (A) is definitely correct. Like you said, had she used 2 of them, she couldn't possibly have an extra week this year. My issue is that we have no reason to…
On an unrelated note, I have some gripes about this one. (Spoilers:)
I don't see why (A) is right. From where I'm standing, it's possible that J used two weeks last year, still had two left over, and transferred half to this year.
Can anyone tell …
I suppose just because J didn't use two weeks doesn't necessarily mean she only used one. It's possible that she only used one week, but maybe she spent some amount of time between none and 1 week, or between 1 week and 2 weeks. Or maybe J didn't us…