LSAT 130 – Section 4 – Question 15

LSAT 130 - Section 4 - Question 15

September 2009

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:56

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question QuickView	Type	Tags	Answer Choices	Curve	Question Difficulty	Psg/Game/S Difficulty	Explanation
PT130 S4 Q15	+LR	Most strongly supported +MSS	A 4% 159 B 62% 166 C 24% 161 D 6% 160 E 4% 158	146 158 170	+Harder	146.168 +SubsectionMedium

Proofs relying crucially on computers provide less certainty than do proofs not requiring computers. Human cognition alone cannot verify computer-dependent proofs; such proofs can never provide the degree of certainty that attends our judgments concerning, for instance, simple arithmetical facts, which can be verified by human calculation. Of course, in these cases one often uses electronic calculators, but here the computer is a convenience rather than a supplement to human cognition.

Summary

Proofs that rely on computers give less certainty than do proofs that don’t require using computers. This is because humans alone can’t verify computer-dependent proofs. With proofs that don’t require computers, we can verify them by human calculation. Note that although we often use computers to verify these non-computer-dependent proofs, we’re using these computers for convenience, not because we depend on the computers.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

Computers can provide assistance concerning tasks for which computers are not necessary.
Whether humans can verify a proof without the aid of computers is a factor in the level of certainty that the proof provides.

Only if a proof’s result is arrived at without the help of a computer can one judge with any degree of certainty that the proof is correct.

Unsupported. The stimulus acknowledges that computers can aid in the proof of non-computer-dependent proofs. So, it might be possible to judge that such proofs are correct even if we arrive at those proofs with the aid of computers.

We can never be completely sure that proofs relying crucially on computers do not contain errors that humans do not detect.

Strongly supported. We’re told that human cognition can’t verify computer-dependent proofs. And if they can’t verify such proofs, that suggests they can’t detect every single error in those proofs. So, some errors may slip by that humans can’t detect.

Whenever a computer replaces human calculation in a proof, the degree of certainty provided by the proof is reduced.

Unsupported. The stimulus acknowledges that we can use computers for convenience for non-computer-dependent proofs. And if such computer makes an error, we can catch the error through human calculation.

If one can corroborate something by human calculation, one can be completely certain of it.

Unsupported. Human ability to confirm something by calculation may mean we can be more certain about the thing, but that doesn’t imply we can be “completely” certain of it.

It is impossible to supplement the cognitive abilities of humans by means of artificial devices such as computers.

Unsupported. The stimulus tells us that when we use calculators to perform calculations that could be done by humans, we are not using calculators as a supplement. But that doesn’t imply it’s impossible for devices to supplement human cognition in other contexts.

LSAT 130 – Section 4 – Question 15

LSAT 130 - Section 4 - Question 15

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 130 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Leave a Reply Cancel