# Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

### AuthorTopic: October 2004 LSAT, Section 2 of the practice test  (Read 505 times)

#### smiley111

• Full Member
• Posts: 53
##### October 2004 LSAT, Section 2 of the practice test
« on: April 14, 2010, 12:31:15 PM »
October 2004 LSAT, Section 2 of the practice test

Problems for the 1st LR section

#9--Assumption question
I am stuck on B and C since when negated I think they both destroy the argument.
B--Price is never an accurate indication and C--Reputation doesn’t always indicate the quality are very similar to me (Price is always and Reputation does always)

#14--Must be true
D and E look similar to me too? Is E wrong because the conclusion states that the economy is bad and the answer choice says that it is implied that there is a slump in the Real Estate and Car industry?
And why is D correct?

Thank you guys

#### Cambridge LSAT

• Full Member
• Posts: 30
##### Re: October 2004 LSAT, Section 2 of the practice test
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2010, 01:04:24 AM »
#9--Assumption question
I am stuck on B and C since when negated I think they both destroy the argument.
B--Price is never an accurate indication and C--Reputation doesn’t always indicate the quality are very similar to me (Price is always and Reputation does always)

In negating B, you have taken the polar opposite, as opposed to the logical opposite. Properly negated, it should read “Price is sometimes an accurate indication of the quality of a bottle of wine.” Since the negated form of choice B is compatible with the conclusion, it is incorrect.

#14--Must be true
D and E look similar to me too? Is E wrong because the conclusion states that the economy is bad and the answer choice says that it is implied that there is a slump in the Real Estate and Car industry?
And why is D correct?

Although the stimulus and choices contain qualifiers such as likely and probable, we can simplify. The key premise can be boiled down into the following conditional statement:
If there is a real estate slump and a car sales slump, then the economy is doing badly. (real estate slump + car sales slump → unhealthy economy)

The stimulus presents the dual occurrence as sufficient indication of a slumping economy. Choice D is basically the contrapositive of this statement. Choice E is a mistaken reversal in that it treats the unhealthy economy as the sufficient condition.