LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5374
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#84733
Your analysis is correct, leslie7, in the sense that you have all the relationships lined up the right way, and you're right that A is incorrect because it is backwards . We wouldn't diagram it the way you did simply because we reserve those arrows for conditional relationships, while this argument is entirely causal, and causal reasoning, while it has some conditional underpinnings, typically requires the application of a different set of tools. Mixing up the two can lead you to select wrong answers, including some trap answers where the authors know some students are likely to stray.

If the argument is causal, use a causal analysis, and if it is conditional, use a conditional analysis. To quote Ghostbusters, "Don't cross the streams!"
User avatar
 sseyedali
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: May 14, 2021
|
#87209
Hi there,

I am just a bit confused about the explanation for why E) is incorrect. Is it because the stimulus already states that proteins can result in lowering of anxiety of mood, and so the statement can't be an assumption (its explicit in the stimulus)? Also any clarification on the explanation that "since the author's argument contains a scenario that would allow for the opposite of this answer choice to occur, this answer is not an assumption of the argument", would be great as well. Thank you.
 Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1819
  • Joined: Dec 06, 2013
|
#87221
sseyedali,

I don't see any indication in the stimulus that protein consumption lowers mood. The only statement about mood is in the conclusion, where it's claimed that sugars can play a role in mood elevation. That doesn't entail that protein consumption has the opposite effect. Beyond that, I don't think the argument relies on proteins having a negative effect on mood, so not only does the stimulus avoid making a statement like answer choice (E) already, I don't see why the argument would need it to be true.

As far as the explanation goes, it is drawing an inference from the application of the Assumption Negation Technique. Because the correct answer to a (Necessary) Assumption question must be something the arguments needs to be true, the negation of that correct answer should weaken the argument. What the explanation above is pointing out is that the negation of answer choice (E) is compatible with the argument, so the Assumption Negation Technique confirms that answer choice (E) is not an assumption required for the argument, so it's an incorrect answer. For more on the Assumption Negation Technique, see here: viewtopic.php?p=31896#p31896

Robert Carroll
User avatar
 sseyedali
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: May 14, 2021
|
#87913
Thank you very much, Robert, I appreciate the help.

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.