July 2020 LSAT Section 1 Question 9

Essayist: Practical intelligence is the ability to discover means to ends. This ability is a skill-something that do...

AndrewArabie on September 30, 2022

A or B

I chose the correct answer though I was heavily considering A. My reason for not choosing it went something like "A being can still develop PI in a state of isolation if that beings surroundings were adversarial." Is that the correct reasoning? On top of that, B seemed more relevant to the conclusion and A related more to the premises. Did I get lucky or is that the right reasoning? How can I make sure I'm not conflicted like that again?

Replies

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

Already have an account? log in

Emil-Kunkin on October 5, 2022

Hi Andrewarabie,

You raise a good point about A- I don't think the ranger would always have to agree with it. However, that isn't what the question is asking. Rather, we are being asked to strengthen the idea that people should not be fined in this one instance. A does that completely. Itn would enable us to say that, since A, we should not fine people.

C does not. The fact the public can't be expected to know more than rangers does not prove they should not be fined. We need an answer choice that explicitly tells us when it is not appropriate to fine people.

Emil-Kunkin on October 5, 2022

Apologies again, my last message was in response to another question of yours.

I think your reasoning makes sense, however, I would keep in mind the job you are doing. We're looking to make this argument correct, so we are trying to prove this being would not have PI. I think your reasoning makes sense for why A does not prove this.

AndrewArabie on October 5, 2022

Thank you Emil!