to the top

#2 - A university psychology department received a large

eober
LSAT Master
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:35 pm
Points: 0

Hi,

In this question I understand how answer choice A weakens the argument- by weakening the proof she gives and offering another possibility for the high ranking. Doesn't answer choice D do the same? Or did I make an assumption with D by thinking "if she is a member of the textbook committee she must have given the textbook highest ranking".

Thanks for your help!
Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:01 pm
Points: 2,401

I think you nailed it with your own self-analysis - you made an unwarranted assumption about how the department chair voted, and perhaps also about how much that one vote may have influenced the final result. Perhaps there were 100 members on the committee with equal voting power? Again it comes down to picking the BEST answer, rather than one that might also work. While D might have some impact, depending on the circumstances, A has a much bigger and clearer impact, so it has to be the credited response. Focus on picking the best answer, rather than a "correct" answer or a "good" answer, and you'll have a much easier time of it.
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam
SMR
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 3:33 am
Points: 0

Hi! Which statement in this stimulus is the conclusion and why is it the conclusion? I got the answer correct but I want to make sure that I identified the conclusion correctly.


Thank you!
David Boyle
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 1:25 am
Points: 743

SMR wrote:Hi! Which statement in this stimulus is the conclusion and why is it the conclusion? I got the answer correct but I want to make sure that I identified the conclusion correctly.


Thank you!


Hello,

The department chair's conclusion is that the book was chosen solely for academic reasons. The conclusion is weakened by answer A, which shows that the textbook committee is not objective as the chair implicitly claimed, but, rather, the committee was swayed by the donation. So the committee was not objective, and the proof that the chair gave for her conclusion (the proof being that the committee gave the book a high rating) is invalid.

David