LR Question 9 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: Cultural historian: Universal acceptance of scientific theories…
QUESTION TYPE: Sufficient Assumption
CONCLUSION: If we think we’re just objects controlled by natural laws then morality will decline.
REASONING: Not believe responsible ➞ not ashamed at immorality ➞ moral decline
ANALYSIS: The missing link is between thinking we’re subject to natural forces outside our control and not thinking we’re responsible for our actions. The chain should be:
Thinking we’re subject to forces ➞ Not believe responsible ➞ not ashamed at immorality ➞ moral decline
___________
- This doesn’t let us connect anything to people not believing they were responsible.
- CORRECT. If that happens, then they won’t become ashamed at immorality and morals will decline.
- This doesn’t let us connect natural laws to believing you’re not responsible.
- So? We don’t even know if those theories are correct.
- We’re trying to conclude “decline in morality.” This doesn’t help.
Note: It’s very useful to diagram sufficient assumption questions. They’re almost always in this format:
Example: The conclusion is: A➞ D
The premises are one of the following. There is a gap between letters. :
A B ➞ C ➞ D
A ➞ B ➞ C D
A ➞ B C ➞ D
In each case the right answer will provide the missing link.
More Resources for Sufficient Assumption Questions
- Conditional Reasoning Article: Learn about conditional statements.
- LR Diagrams Guide: Learn how to draw LR diagrams.
- Intro to Conditional Reasoning: Learn conditional reasoning basics.
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Sufficient Assumption questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers sufficient assumption questions.
Hi Graeme,
It appears like this might not be the answer for the good question . The LSAT 37, question 9, is a sufficient assumption, but it talks about the influence of environment and innate mechanisms on young children… Thanks!
That’s section II. This is for section IV.
I’ve been trying to think of a way to fit the section number on here somewhere, but it’s pretty space constrained. The “logical reasoning II” means it’s the second LR section, not section II.
Graeme