I have a question about how this question would be drawn up- because of the necessary "unless" indicator I used the unless equation to generate this statement:
Ask for directions Were lost
So I do not see how he arrives at a different conclusion...
#9 - Rifka: We do not need to stop and ask for directions.
6 posts • Page 1 of 1
You certainly diagrammed the "unless" statement correctly.
Rifka is saying, "If we ask for directions, then we're lost." That doesn't do much for Rifka or Craig in determining whether they're lost. Craig implicitly agrees with the statement because he's recommending that they stop for directions because they are lost.
So they reach different conclusions. RIfka's conclusion is the first sentence: "We do not need to stop to ask for directions," while Craig's conclusion is the opposite.
yes that clarifies it- I should have referred back to her conclusion rather than agonizing over the conditional sentence.
I am having trouble understanding why C is incorrect and am confused by what "deny one of Rifka's implicit premises" means on answer choice B. Any insight would be greatly appreciated!
As you probably know, this is one of those "Method of Reasoning" questions. It's also a good question to try to prephrase so the sneaky LSAT answers don't try to lead you astray.
First, let's look at the correct answer choice, which was answer choice (B). Rifka's implicit premise (meaning "unstated" premise") is that they are not lost. We know this because she tells us that the only time one stops and asks for directions is because one is lost and they do not need to stop for directions.
Craig's statement's "The fact that we are lost . . . " is denying Rifka's implicit premise that they are not lost. I hope that helps.
Let's take a look at incorrect answer choice (C). This is a very, very tricky question, with only 40% of test takers getting it correct. My guess would be that a lot of people selected answer choice (C) as their (wrong) answer.
Does Craig "reject Rifka's conclusion?" Absolutely. Rifka says they shouldn't stop and Crais says they should stop. However, look at the middle of answer choice (C). As we know from our discussion of answer choice (B), Craig does NOT accept the truth of Rifka's premises. Remember, Rifka has an implicit premise that they are not lost lost. In the stimulus, Craig fires back and explicitly states that they ARE lost.
Hope this helps!
Thank you for clearing that up, Anthony!
6 posts • Page 1 of 1