LSAT 108 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q11

LR Question 11 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Mario: The field of cognitive science …

QUESTION TYPE: Point at Issue

ARGUMENTS:

MARIO’S ARGUMENT: * An autonomous discipline has a domain of inquiry all its own

• But cognitive science addresses issues also addressed by other disciplines
• So, cognitive science isn’t genuinely autonomous

LUCY’S ARGUMENT: * Mario, you think philosophy is a genuinely autonomous discipline

• Philosophy also addresses issues addressed by other disciplines
• So you already believe in at least one discipline that is autonomous despite sharing subject matter with other disciplines
• So your principle can’t be right. Instead, autonomy comes from having a unique methodology, not a unique subject matter.

ANALYSIS: Mario thinks: Autonomous → Unique Domain

Lucy rejects this criterion. She says: Autonomous → Unique Methodology.

So if a discipline doesn’t have unique issues, Lucy still thinks it can be autonomous. Mario doesn’t think it can be autonomous.

___________

1. CORRECT. Lucy says yes, Mario says no.
2. Neither commits themselves on this. Mario never discusses methodology. Lucy says unique methodology can make something autonomous, but she doesn’t say non-autonomous fields can’t also have unique methodologies.
3. Neither commits to this. Mario gives a necessary condition (unique domain), not a sufficient one. Lucy doesn’t say the combination guarantees autonomy.
4. Way too strong. Neither says both are necessary.
5. Out of scope. Nobody says this.