QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumptions
CONCLUSION: Computers can not be experts because human experts do not store their past experience as rules and facts.
REASONING: Human experts can draw on past experience to form an intuitive reaction to a new situation.
ANALYSIS: The argument implies that computers store information as rules and facts. Human experts don’t store their knowledge this way.
The argument is assuming there is no way to translate expert knowledge into something that computers could understand.
- This doesn’t matter. We don’t even know how much originality designers built into computers.
- CORRECT. If there is a way to translate expert knowledge into something a computer can understand then computers might be able to mimic experts.
- This doesn’t matter. If humans don’t rely on such information then the argument is stronger because computers rely on rules and facts.
- Even if computers can sort through more information they still might not be able to understand the type of knowledge that experts have.
- It doesn’t matter if experts rely on intuition while building their model. It only matters if they can successfully use intuition once they have finished building a model.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly