Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: LR dec 1996 #20 (AKA WTF??!!)  (Read 400 times)

uwofresh

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
    • View Profile
LR dec 1996 #20 (AKA WTF??!!)
« on: May 19, 2005, 05:23:41 PM »
Ann will either take a leave of absence from technocomp adn return in a year or else she will quit her job there; but she would nto do either one unless she were offered a one yr teaching fewllowship at a prestigious university.  Technocomp will allow her to take a leave of absense if it does not find out that she has been offered the fellowship, but not otherwise.  Therefore Ann will quit her job at technocomp only if technocomp finds out she has been ffereed the fellowship.

Which one of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion abve to be properly drawn?

A.) Technocomp will find out about Ann being offered the fellowship only if someone informs on her.
B.) The reason Ann wants the felloship is so she can quit her job at Technocomp.
C.) Technocomp does not allow any of its employees to take a leave of absense in order to work for one of its competitors.
D.) Ann will take a leave of absense if Technocomp allows her to take a leave of absense.
E.) Ann would be offered the fellowship only if she quit her job at Technocomp.











The right answer was D.

I only chose that one cause the others just didn't seem right...Nonetheless, I'm not 100% sure why D is the right answer.


lilVdogg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: LR dec 1996 #20 (AKA WTF??!!)
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2005, 06:17:04 PM »
I agree with your sentiments - I doubt I would have gotten this under timed conditions.

The first sentence sucks.  On first read through I had the following:

leave of absence OR quit -> offered fellowship

But if you look closely at the remaining rules they all ASSUME "offered fellowship" so really the first sentence gives us:

leave of absence -> !quit
cp: quit -> !(leave of absence)     (!=NOT/NEGATE)

Then we get:

!(Technocomp finds out) -> allowed leave of absence
cp: !(allowed leave of absence) -> Technocomp finds out

And they conclude:  quit -> Technocomp finds out

So we are missing:

!(leave of absence) -> !(allowed leave of absence)
cp: allowed leave of absence -> leave of absence

D gives us just what we need.