to the top

#18- There is little plausibility to the claim that it is

ronnieronnie
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 11:24 pm
Points: 0

Hey Guys,

So I am reviewing my last practice test, wrong and right answers, as per Nikki advice, and already I am finding I need the explanations for multiple problems. Can I find these online somewhere? Or should I just list them here and you guys can help me out? If I can find them online it would be great if you guys could tell me where. But just in case they aren't on here, here are the problems I re-picked wrong answers for or didn't quite understand:

#18- I fell for answer choice C twice, because I was not certain which was the conclusion. I thought however, was a counter-premise indicator in the stimulus, but its the conclusion??)

Thanks in advance guys!
Ronnie
Nikki Siclunov
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 1383
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:31 am
Points: 1,208

Ronnie,

There are no explanations for the practice tests, but we'd be happy to discuss them on the forum.

Regarding #18, the word "however" is a counter-premise indicator, but it can also be used in a more general sense to indicate a counterargument: it all depends on the structure of the counterargument. Here, the last sentence supports the preceding one, as it explains why there is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental. Therefore, the conclusion is the third sentence of the stimulus.

Answer choice (C) is incorrect for two separate reasons: First, having "little plausibility" is not quite the same as having "some" plausibility. If you think about it, they have almost opposite meanings. Do you see why? Second, the main conclusion is not the first sentence of the stimulus due to the presence of the counterargument as described above.

Hope this helps!
Nikki Siclunov
PowerScore Test Preparation
stephaniemaui
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 2:03 pm
Points: 5

Hi, I am still confused with this question.

Can you please explain to me the difference between "there is little plausibility" and "there is some plausibility" ?

I am understanding that if there is little there exists some plausibility. But obviously this is not correct.

Your help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
Jonathan Evans
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 2:12 pm
Points: 570
Location: DFW, Texas

Hi, Stephanie,

First, just want to make sure that we're clear that the main conclusion is the third sentence in the stimulus. The argument is structured thus:

  1. Author acknowledges validity to another point of view.
  2. Premise backing up other point of view.
  3. Main Conclusion: This is the author's point of view.
  4. Premise backing up main conclusion.

The distinction between "some plausibility" and "little plausibility" concerns the first statement in the stimulus.

Let's discuss this concept with three hypothetical examples:

  1. There is some plausibility that I am King of England.
  2. There is a little plausibility that I am King of England.
  3. There is little plausibility that I am King of England.

What does each of these statements imply?

  1. This statement implies that there is some real chance that I am King of England.
  2. This statement also implies that there is some real chance that I am King of England, but it is a small chance.
  3. This statement implies that there is not much chance I am King of England. There could be a small chance, or there could be no chance.

Notice the difference between statements 2 and 3 above. In statement 2, there is definitely a chance. In statement 3, there could be a chance, or there might not be a chance.

This distinction also holds for the term "few," as in:

  • Some people will come to my party. People are showing up.
  • A few people will come to my party. At least someone is showing up.
  • Few people will come to my party. Maybe someone will show up. Maybe no one will show up.

I hope this helps!
stephaniemaui
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 2:03 pm
Points: 5

Jonathan,

Thank you very much for your hypotheticals and for providing a thorough explanation. I also appreciate you including the examples of "few". Thanks!
BostonLawGuy
LSAT Leader
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:49 pm
Points: 52

The explanations regarding why the correct answer is the only correct answer are very helpful. However, It has not yet been established if there are indeed, two separate conclusions in this argument. (Only one of which is reproduced and credited in answer E.)

Premise: People must assess one another and not all assessments will be positive.
Conclusion 1: ThereforeThere is little plausibility to claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical. (emphasis mine)

Premise: To be judgmental is not merely to assess someone negatively, but to do so prior to making an effort to understand.
Conclusion 2: There is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental.

My question: Perhaps what appears to be conclusion #1 in my evaluation, is really a sub-conclusion that gives some sort of support to the main conclusion (#2, which is the credited response)?
Alex Bodaken
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2018 10:18 am
Points: 135

BostonLawGuy,

Thanks for the question and the explanation - you are right that there are two conclusions in this stimulus, and they are the two you note. And you are right as well that only one of those one of those two conclusions is reproduced in answer E, making it the right answer. I also think you are right that your "conclusion #1" is a subconclusion - it is a statement intended to set up the main conclusion that "There is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental." Nice work!

Best,
Alex