December 2003 LSAT Section 2 Question 19

Professor: It has been argued that freedom of thought is a precondition for intellectual progress, because freedom o...

AndrewArabie on July 28 at 05:31PM

Answer choice C

I knew the answer choice had to establish that freedom of thought and intellectual discipline are mutually exclusive. The explanation claims (C) does this but I don't see it. Are the societies in (C) experiencing intellectual progress? If they are then I don't see how (C) guarantees the conclusion. I need explanation of this question and answer.

Replies

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

Already have an account? log in

Emil-Kunkin on July 30 at 09:59PM

I don't think we know anything about the societies in question in C, but I think you're spot on in what you're anticipating. We know that the author is rejecting the view that one thing is necessary on the grounds that another thing is also necessary.

Of course, this is a bit silly. Two things can both be necessary conditions. In order to prove this argument we would need to show that one of the necessary things inherently precludes the other. That is, we need to show that if you have ID then you cannot have FT, or the contrapositive of that statement.

I think c does this pretty well. It's a general rule that tells us whenever we have one, we cannot have the other.

AndrewArabie on July 31 at 06:33PM

Thank you Emil