Free LSAT Practice
LSAT Practice Test
LSAT Practice Test Videos
eBook: The Road to 180
Law School Top 100
LSAT Test Proctor
LSAT Logic Games
Apple App Store
Digital LSAT Simulator
Campus Rep Internship
Fee Waiver Scholarship
LSAT Test Dates
LSAT Message Board
June 2010 LSAT
Humankind would not have survived, as it clearly has, if our ancestors had not been motivated by the desire to sacrif...
on August 24, 2015
Please explain answer
on September 3, 2015
"if our ancestors had not been motivated by the desire to sacrifice themselves when doing so would ensure the survival of their children or other close relatives, then humankind would not have survived."
P1: not MDS ==> not HS
HS ==> MDS
We are also told that this kind of sacrifice, i.e. "MDS," is a form of altruism.
P2: MDS ==> A
not A ==> not MDS
We know that humankind has clearly survived
It follows that our ancestors were at least partially altruistic
So we are given a principle rule. We know that the contrapositive of this rule is triggered because we have "HS," so we can connect the contrapositive of P1 to P2 like so: HS ==> MDS ==> A to conclude A. Therefore, we have a valid contrapositive transitive argument.
Answer choice (A) has the same exact pattern of reasoning.
"Students do not raise their grades if they do not increase the amount of time they spend studying."
P1: not IAS ==> not SRG
SRG ==> IAS
"Increased study time requires good time management."
P2: IAS ==> GTM
not GTM ==> not IAS
"some students do raise their grades."
"So some students manage their time well."
Just as in the passage, we are given a principle rule. We know that the contrapositive of the rule is triggered because we have "SRG." SO we can connect the contrapositive of P1 to P2 like so: SRG ==> IAS ==> GTM to conclude "GTM." So, just like the argument in the passage, we have a valid contrapositive transitive argument.
Hope that clears things up! Please let us know if you have any other questions.
Posting to the forum is only allowed for members with active accounts.