I like answer b as well. The question and answer b are making assumptions that are based on factors not included in the information we've been provided. In the question we don't have proof that her tour was well publicized. In answer b we don't have proof that her needs this year are the same as last year.
It makes more sense that E is the correct answer because there is no iff. The iff is implied in the caring-for-cacti response because biological organisms will certainly die if their care is drastically neglected. As readers, we are not informed as to the species of cactus in question; therefore, it would be too much conjecture to assume that shade and watering requirements do not require strict adherance; on the other hand, fashion is highly subjective, and it stands to reason that minor deviations from fashion guidance are low-stakes--social norms would most likely keep the lack of a narrow lapel or double vest in-bounds, even if not both. I would challenge this question if my answer were graded as incorrect. Unfortunately, I don't know how to challenge questions--nobody has made any videos on this matter in terms of the content I've audited online.
Answer Choice E contains valid logic, both sufficient conditions (i.e. suit vents and narrow lapels) were met to result in the necessary condition (I.e. fashionably dressed). C would be correct because it confuses a sufficient condition for a necessary condition just as the stimulus argument does.
He did mess up translating the "only if". He also messed it up with answer choice A. There are two necessary conditions for choice A, and he indicated two sufficient conditions. Here is a good explanation: forum.powerscore.com/lsat/viewtopic.php?t=4753
Yes, I was thinking the same thing… Im reviewing for the LSAT flex & he messes up by using “only if” to introduce a sufficient condition when it is supposed to introduce a necessary condition. This would be much more useful to quickly understand how the answer choice is incorrect.
I like answer b as well. The question and answer b are making assumptions that are based on factors not included in the information we've been provided. In the question we don't have proof that her tour was well publicized. In answer b we don't have proof that her needs this year are the same as last year.
It makes more sense that E is the correct answer because there is no iff. The iff is implied in the caring-for-cacti response because biological organisms will certainly die if their care is drastically neglected. As readers, we are not informed as to the species of cactus in question; therefore, it would be too much conjecture to assume that shade and watering requirements do not require strict adherance; on the other hand, fashion is highly subjective, and it stands to reason that minor deviations from fashion guidance are low-stakes--social norms would most likely keep the lack of a narrow lapel or double vest in-bounds, even if not both.
I would challenge this question if my answer were graded as incorrect. Unfortunately, I don't know how to challenge questions--nobody has made any videos on this matter in terms of the content I've audited online.
Answer Choice E contains valid logic, both sufficient conditions (i.e. suit vents and narrow lapels) were met to result in the necessary condition (I.e. fashionably dressed). C would be correct because it confuses a sufficient condition for a necessary condition just as the stimulus argument does.
I’m confuse with the diagram of answer choice D. “Only if” introduces the necessary condition but the narrator reversed it!
He did mess up translating the "only if". He also messed it up with answer choice A. There are two necessary conditions for choice A, and he indicated two sufficient conditions. Here is a good explanation: forum.powerscore.com/lsat/viewtopic.php?t=4753
Yes, I was thinking the same thing… Im reviewing for the LSAT flex & he messes up by using “only if” to introduce a sufficient condition when it is supposed to introduce a necessary condition. This would be much more useful to quickly understand how the answer choice is incorrect.
Why was I think the answer was E?
Shouldn't the logic of A read as follows: "If it turns out, then one followed it exactly and used high quality ingredients"?