Since anyone who supports the new tax plan has no chance of being elected, and anyone who truly understands economics...
HannahncaudillDecember 23, 2019
Do not understand how the argument ignores the possibility of (D)
Hello, I was unable to comment on the other discussion, so I am creating a new one.
I also chose (B) and am still having a hard time understanding why (D) is the correct answer (like Jory mentioned in the previous discussion, the diagrams confuse me when using them to answer questions like these, so I am trying to understand without them). I am probably reading this incorrectly, but it doesn't seem like the passage ignores the possibility of (D).
The passage indicates that, "anyone who truly understands economics would not support the tax plan" but I don't see how that explicitly ignores the possibility that some people who do not support the tax plan do not truly understand economics.
I would greatly appreciate the help! Thank you!
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
I agree, it's important to be able to manage LR without diagramming. Let's break this one down and try to think about it without. I'll write out the conditions for reference, but try to explain from a less technical/diagramming standpoint.
Since anyone who supports the new tax plan (S) has no chance of being elected (N)
Contrapositive: if you have a chance of being elected, you don’t support the tax plan.
and
anyone who truly understands economics (S) would not support the tax plan (N)
Contrapositive: if you do support the tax plan, you’re not someone who truly understands economics
Conclusion:
only someone who truly understands economics (N) would have any chance of being elected (S)
In other words, the conclusion says: if you have a chance at being elected, you’re someone who truly understands economics. And if you’re not someone who truly understands economics, you have no chance at being elected.
The first thing I would take note of is the necessary condition in that conclusion. Here, it's anyone who truly understands economics. But wait, did the stimulus ever say that understanding economics was necessary to having a chance at being elected? What about all the people that don't understand economics, but also don't agree with the tax plan? According the the premises, the only necessary condition to being elected is not supporting the tax plan. So, if you truly understand economics that's all fine and dandy, but you don't *need* to in order to have a chance at being elected.
Because people who truly understand economics don’t fall into the group that supports the new tax plan, they’re not automatically deemed as having no chance at being elected as would be the case if they were in that group. However, there's nothing that says there aren't other people who don't truly understand economics but also still don't support the tax plan that could have a chance too. The only necessary condition for having a chance at being elected is that if you’re going to have a chance, you can’t support the new tax plan (first premise, its contrapositive).
This conclusion says anyone who has a chance at being elected must be someone who truly understands economics. This conclusion makes truly understanding economics necessary to having any chance at being elected, which is not what our argument says. So, the conclusion ignores the possibility that there are others (of course, besides those who support the tax plan) that don’t truly understand economics but could also have a chance at being elected. Say, for instance, your distant cousin Oprah Winfrey—let’s say she does not support the tax plan, but is also not someone who truly understands economics. Could she have a chance at winning the election? According to this, yep! This argument goes wrong by making someone who truly understands economics necessary to having a chance at winning an election, when our premises don’t actually mean that. The only necessary condition we have for having a chance at winning the election, by the contrapositive of A, is that they are not someone who supports the new tax plan. Since Oprah doesn’t, even without truly understanding economics, she could have a chance.
So, Oprah here is someone who could have a chance at being elected who does not support the tax plan and also does not truly understand economics, making D our winner.
Hope this helps! This is a tricky question!
HannahncaudillDecember 26, 2019
This was extremely helpful. I appreciate you taking the time to explain this in detail.
Thank you!
RaviJanuary 16, 2020
@Hannahcaudill, let us know if you have any other questions!
