Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Can someone please explain a LR problem? Prep 45 Dec 2004 Sect 2 #21  (Read 545 times)

CaptainSparrow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
It's a justify/sufficient question

I get why A is correct since if there is a causal link, we wouldn't have the discrepancy listed in the stimulus. But I am having hard time understanding why B is not correct since it seems like it's saying the same thing...
Preptests: 167, 163, 164, 160

Dec 08:

Kels

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Can someone please explain a LR problem? Prep 45 Dec 2004 Sect 2 #21
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2008, 11:32:02 AM »
yea this is a tricky question. B is incorrect because...

1) The stimulus says there were MANY extinctions that didn't follow any known meteor impact; And that there are MANY records of major meteor impacts that do not seem to have been followed by mass extinctions.

2) Answer choice B says Major meteor impacts and mass extinctions cannot be consistently causally linked unless many mass extinctions have followed major meteor impacts.

B is consistent with what the stimulus says because there could be MANY meteor impacts that did result in mass extinctions, while at the same time MANY meteor impacts did not result in mass extinctions.

choice A uses the word ALL instead of MANY. With justify questions I always look for strong language over weak language. 

Kantian

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: Can someone please explain a LR problem? Prep 45 Dec 2004 Sect 2 #21
« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2008, 08:22:00 PM »
yea this is a tricky question. B is incorrect because...

1) The stimulus says there were MANY extinctions that didn't follow any known meteor impact; And that there are MANY records of major meteor impacts that do not seem to have been followed by mass extinctions.

2) Answer choice B says Major meteor impacts and mass extinctions cannot be consistently causally linked unless many mass extinctions have followed major meteor impacts.

B is consistent with what the stimulus says because there could be MANY meteor impacts that did result in mass extinctions, while at the same time MANY meteor impacts did not result in mass extinctions.

choice A uses the word ALL instead of MANY. With justify questions I always look for strong language over weak language. 

That's a really good tip and thank you. I suppose stronger wording in justify questions always seem better when confused.

Kels

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Can someone please explain a LR problem? Prep 45 Dec 2004 Sect 2 #21
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2008, 10:10:39 PM »
Yea the other thing that helped me out a lot is looking for weak language for necessary assumption questions and inference questions.