Most veterinarians, and especially those at university veterinary research centers, have a devoted interest in the bi...
ShannonOh22August 2, 2019
Question!! And request for vid
Hey guys - a lot of these logical reasoning questions would do well to have a video explanation accompanying them. Whenever you are able to explain it using written (typed) diagram, that should be an indication that it qualifies for a video, no? On this question, I diagrammed everything, but would love to have it explained verbally. Here is what I did on my own, but no answer jumped out at me as being completely correct (CANNOT BE TRUE), so please tell me where I am going wrong...
Vet @ Research Center (VRC) -most- DIBS
NOT DIBS -some- NOT VRC
Vet -most- LA
NOT LA -some- NOT Vet
DIBS and NOT LA --> NOT PV
PV --> NOT DIBS or LA
Is this incorrect? I am unsure of how I reversed the quantifier statements...I know we can't come up with a contrapositive for quantifiers, but we can make MOST into SOME, etc. Please help!! Thanks! :)
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Thanks for your message. I will let the curriculum team know about your video explanation request. Also, feel free to contact our support staff to let them know you'd like more video explanations. You can do so by tapping "support" from the left menu or by calling 855.483.7862 ext. 2 Monday through Friday from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. PT.
In the meantime, I'm happy to write out an explanation for this question.
First off, "most" statements do not have contrapositives, so the second part of your first and second conditional statements is incorrect.
The correct diagram is
Vets - most - >interest in BS
Vets - most - >love animals
BS and not love animals - >no prominent vets prominent vets - >not BS or love animals
From the premises of the argument, we can make the conclusion that some people with an interest in biological science love animals.
We're looking for an answer choice that must be false, so we're looking for something that contradicts the conclusion we made from the premises or the premises themselves.
(C) says, "Prominent veterinarians at some veterinary research centers are intensely devoted to the biological sciences but do not feel any pronounced affection for animals. "
(C) isn't possible because the stimulus told us that there are no prominent vets who are interested in science but do not love animals, so (C) must be false. (C) is a direct contradiction of the third premise of the argument, which is the last sentence
BS and not love animals - >no prominent vets prominent vets - >not BS or love animals
You correctly diagrammed this last premise, and if you look at what it says, prominent vets must be either not BS or love animals. With (C), we know that they are BS, so then this means that they must love animals because they have to satisfy at least one of the necessary conditions of that statement.
Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any other questions!
nizhoniSeptember 13, 2019
Hey Ravi. Yeah...I've been looking at all the comments on the message board and I agree, it would be nice if there were video explanations for ALL the questions. Its not about questions that have a visual component or not. Some people need to HEAR the explanations and work out the problems alongside the video. Please take this back to curriculum team. I think enough students have requested for video explanations and even if you think its not necessary, the students think it would aid their understand. Plus, it can't hurt.
GoziDecember 5, 2019
I too, am in agreement with the others requesting a video explanation for ALL the problems. The necessity of the videos due to a lack of a "visual component" is subjective in my opinion. There are some questions where I would really appreciate the ability to HEAR a problem worked out. Thanks!
