Book Review:  When I read a novel set in a city I know well, I must see that the writer knows the city at least as we...

Ravi January 21, 2020

@Mazen,

Do you mean you're struggling between (B) and (D)? Those are the two
answer choices I found similar. (A) is far different from both of
them.

With (A), we have

TN - >EN

(D) and (B) are nearly identical, with the exception that (D) is
talking about trusting a novel, whereas (B) is talking about trusting
a novelist. However, when diagramming them, they're almost the same. I
think this is what you were talking about. I watched Naz's
explanation, and I agree with you and disagree with how she diagrammed
(D).

With (D), we have

Not know city well - >not trust novel

The contrapositive of this is

Trust novel - >Know city well

With (B), we have

Trust novelist as storyteller - >set in city book reviewer knows well

this is very similar in structure to (D).

Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any questions!

Mazen January 22, 2020

Ravi,

I did mean A and D. I did not have a problem diagramming B, because it is vey straight forward; the "if" introduces the sufficient.

The problem I had is not with the meaning/interpretation. I struggled with the structure of the syntax. Even though both A and D have the same syntactical structure, they were diagrammed in reverse to one another.

Specifically, I struggled with A ("The book reviewer enjoys virtually any novel written by a novelist whom she trusts") and D ("The book reviewer does not trust any novel set in a city that she does not know well") because Naz assigns to the two syntactically matching parts in each answer choice opposite conditionals; necessary and sufficient.

My reasoning is that if they occupy the exact syntactical role in each answer choice, then they should both be either sufficient, or they should both be necessary.

To demonstrate:

"D" as you diagrammed it: Not Know City Well ------> Not Trust Novel
In other words, "D," The book reviewer does not trust any novel set in a city that she does not know well," is logically equivalent to the statement "if a novel set in a city that she does not know well, then she does not trust the novel."

"A" states "The book reviewer enjoys virtually any novel written by a novelist whom she trusts." Similarly, I should be able to restate it as follows: "If the book reviewer trusts the novelist, then the book reviewer enjoys the novelist's novels."

I noted that in both answer choices, A and D, "any" introduces the sufficient part consistent with how you diagrammed it and with Mahran's lecture.

When Naz, however, diagrammed it in a way that had "any" introduce a necessary condition, I was afraid that there is something that I am missing, as was the case with "only few."

Thank you so much Ravi for the clarification!

mkonovodoff February 12, 2020

should we approach every question the same way the explanation did on the practice video? as in, identify fact or argument, then sufficient necessary, then premises, and finally go through options? We do this every time correct?

Mazen February 13, 2020

I am an instructor, but I would say "yes." As a first step, identifying whether the stimulus is a Set of facts or Argument is very helpful to me, and is objectively of utmost importance, because I would then know whether I am looking for conclusions in the answer-choices to be inferred from a "set of facts," or whether it is something else. As per step two, "sufficient-necessary," "quantifiers" (some or most); a combination of the two (conditional-quantifiers); and most importantly, "common sense" which does not take precedence over any of the others, but rather is inherent in their application!

Mazen February 13, 2020

I am NOT* an instructor!!!! NOT*