Only computer scientists understand the architecture of personal computers, and only those who understand the archite...

aharris January 1, 2020

Explanation Q34

I said that the answer choice was D, because based on the way the chain is set up, you can't logically conclude that being a computer scientist means that you will like the technological advances. I'm confused why it's B. Also, will there be video explanations put up for the rest of the Sufficient & Necessary questions? I saw people asked like over a year ago, and it's really helpful to be able to see the questions written out as I'm a visual person, and especially because this is the hardest section.

Replies

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

Already have an account? log in

shunhe January 6, 2020

Hey @spapee,

The problem with (D) is that the premises in the stimulus don't preclude ANY logical conclusion. Actually, there's a perfectly fine logical conclusion we can draw with them.

First premise: if understand the architecture of personal computers - > computer scientist
Second premise: if appreciate the advances in technology made in the last decade - > understand the architecture of personal computers

And we can chain these together to get:

appreciate the advances in technology - > understand the architecture of PCs - > computer scientist

So we CAN conclude

Appreciate advances in technology - > computer scientist

But what the author does is conclude

Computer scientist - > Appreciate advances in technology. Which is a classic mistaken reversal! What's one way to say this? There might be some computer scientists out there who don't appreciate advances in technology, and this is what (B) tells us. Hope this helps!

Chakera-Hightower January 19, 2020

Can someone explain the difference between B and C, I chose C?

shunhe May 2, 2020

Hi @Chakera-Hightower,

Thanks for the question! To recap, we know that

understand PC architecture —> computer scientist
appreciate advances in technology —> understand PC architecture

And so (C) is technically true. (C) tells us that computer scientists might appreciate other things other than technological advances. Yes, computer scientists may appreciate other things, such as long walks on the beach or a good TV show. But this is irrelevant when it comes to the argument; there’s no flaw in the reasoning that results from (C).

(B), on the other hand, points out a serious flaw in the argument, as I pointed out in the above post. The argument is a mistaken reversal, and this is what (B) points out. There could be computer scientists who don’t appreciate the advances in technology made in the last decade, and so it’s not necessarily true that if someone is a computer scientist, then they have to appreciate the technological advancements.

Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.

Ryan-Whyte June 2, 2020

Thanks! I have a question, and this question popped up on the premise drills as well. When finding the conclusion from the premises provided, It is required that we follow from sufficient to necessary, then that necessary becomes sufficient to necessary? Or it doesn't matter?