#19 - If you study history, then you will appreciate the

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[itsme]

Would you please explain this one?

Study hist —> app the diff —> reflect on your own civ
So, study hist —> reflect?

I’m assuming that I mis understood how to diagram “provided”?

Please help

[Ben DiFabbio]

Would you please explain this one?

Study hist —> app the diff —> reflect on your own civ
So, study hist —> reflect?

I’m assuming that I mis understood how to diagram “provided”?

Please help

Hey there!

You're right that the issue in your diagram is that "provided that" is actually a sufficient indicator, not a necessary indicator.

Consider the following example: "I will make it to your party, provided that the L train is running."
The conditional structure is: L train running --> I will make it to your party
What I'm really saying here is that the sole fact of the L train running is enough to guarantee that I'll make it to your party, and if I didn't make it to your party, you can be sure that the L train wasn't running.

So, the two premises in the stimulus of this question don't actually link up. Here's what the stimulus is really saying:
1. Study history --> Appreciate differences
2. Reflect on civilization --> Appreciate differences
= Study history --> Reflect on civilization

The flawed structure is
1. A --> B
2. C --> B
= A --> C

This links up with the flawed structure in answer choice B).

1. Learn Latin --> Improve vocab
2. Study great works --> Improve vocab
= Learn Latin --> study great works

I hope that helps!

Happy studying,

Ben DiFabbio
PowerScore LSAT Instructor

[kells__w]

Hi,
I automatically eliminated B because I thought the strength of the premise didn't match those in the stimulus ("will" vs. "can") do these rules not always apply or are these more synonymous than I thought? And in that case is there a better way to quickly approach parallel and parallel flaw questions?
Thanks in advance,
Kelly.

[Robert Carroll]

Kelly,

The strength of each premise in the stimulus and the correct answer choice is the strength of a conditional. Those "can" statements you're looking at in answer choice (B) are both in the necessary conditions of the conditionals. The premises themselves are conditionals. Further, consider how the stimulus is supposed to work - it works by making the mistake of Mistaken Reversal. Well, answer choice (B) does that as well. Does it matter that the shared condition inside each conditional is a "can"? Not in this case, and I think that's true generally. How strong is each premise? As strong as a conditional. How strong is the conclusion? Equally strong. The strength of the parts inside doesn't seem to me to be a big deal here, and even in general.

Robert Carroll