October 2010 LSAT Section 3 Question 2

Since there is no survival value in an animal's having an organ that is able to function when all its other organs ha...

ishadoshi on August 9, 2019

Question 2

Why isn't the conclusion the first sentence i.e. "It is within human technology to make Mars inhabitable"? When I read it, it felt as if the statement about the research was providing support for that statement, rather that it being the other way around.

Replies

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

ryanconnor1234 on January 4, 2020

I would also like an explanation for this! Thank you

Emil-Kunkin on February 24 at 04:10PM

Let's try the therefore test.

If we say that "research efforts are justified, therefore human tech can change the climate of mars" this doesn't make any sense. How does the fact that something is justified support the massive empirical claim that we can change mars' climate?

However, if we say that "we can change the climate, therefore research is justified" this makes perfect sense. If we are able to do the hard work, that justifies investment into the topic.