#13 - Criticism that the press panders to public sentiment

[BrettKobes]

yes thank you

[ellenb]

Dear Powerscore,

For this question, I linked the diagram a bit different:

Please take a look and let me know whether I have it right:


Not PF--> Subsidy--> Outside Control
-----> not Honest Journalism (this arrow goes down from subsidy since I wanted to combine the last sentence into the whole diagram).

So, I do not even have to write the CP, I can automatically assume HJ--> not Subisdy--> PF

Please let me know whether it is ok to have an arrow down as I did (diagonally from Subsidy) and whether it is fine to combine the last statement into the whole diagram.

Also, for answer choice B, not subsidy---> Honest Journalism, if we have the mistaken negation of the orginal stimulus, how did we get there that no Subidies--> no Propaganda? do we assume that HJ means no Propaganda? How is this answer, a mistaken negation, I thought we have to talk in absolutes. Thus, for the above answer according to the stimulus to be a mistaken Negation it should be Not Subsidy--> Honest Journalism and not

Not Subsidy--> Propaganda,

it seems it is like saying, tea not hot--> can drink, so for a mistaken negation I can say, tea warm--> can drink, and it would be similar to what they did in Answer choice B since not hot includes warm. Please let me know if my thinking about this question seems right.

Also, do we do anything with propaganda? do we diagram it as subsidy--> propaganda, or we assume since there are no indicators words, than it does not need to be diagrammed?

Regards,

Ellen

[BethRibet]

Hi Ellen,

I would diagram this as:

If the press survives --> profit making or subsidized.
PS--> PM/S
If subsidized --> not honest journalism.
S --> ~HJ
The contrapositive on this latter statement:
If HJ -->~S.

So if the press survives, and it is not subsidized, it follows that it must be profit making.
Or If HJ --> PM

This corresponds to answer choice D.

Hope this helps!
Beth

[JRGray57]

Hello,

I was wondering if anyone could help me with the language used in the stimulus of question 10, specifically where it states, "It is easy to get subsidies for propaganda, but no one will subsidize honest journalism." Can someone please explain to me how to go about diagramming Sufficient and Necessary conditions when the words "no", "no one", or "none" are used.

Thanks in advance,
Ryan

[jeff.wren]

Hi Ryan,

Anytime you have a negative conditional statement (such as the words "no, no one, none, never, cannot, not both" etc.) the negative (or slash) goes on the necessary condition rather than the sufficient.

For example, the statement "No apples are oranges" is diagrammed: A -> not B. The contrapositive is diagrammed: B -> not A.

In other words, if you know that you have an apple, then you know that you do not have an orange. In plain English, it is saying that something can't be both an apple and an orange.

Many people place the negative in the sufficient, but this is incorrect. The diagram: not A -> O actually means that if you do not have an apple, you must have an orange. In other words, it would be representing the statement that everything that is not an apple is an orange, meaning that everything is either an apple or an orange. This is not what the original sentence means.

A lot of people confuse the "not both" rule with the "either/or" rule. There is a good discussion of these concepts on p. 2-48 to 2-50.

These concepts will also be discussed further in lesson 5 grouping games, when we introduce the double-not arrow.

I hope that this helps answer your question.

Best,
Jeff

[JRGray57]

Yes that helps a lot! Thanks so much!

[stevo.uoeno]

Hey guys just was hoping someone would be able to clarify something for me. One of the LR questions I was working on states:
"Criticism that the press panders to public sentiment neglects ... [admin note: full text removed due to LSAC copyright restrictions] If the press were not profit-making, who would support it? The only alternative is subsidy."

Now that's just the first part of the question. I haven't posted the rest because that part doesn't concern me. What's really confusing me is that the correct diagram for the above statements is: PM---->S

However I was taught that "the only" always introduces a sufficient condition, and as a result I diagrammed it as follows: S---->PM

Could someone please clarify this rule for me? Thanks

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hey stevo.uoeno,

Thanks for your post, and welcome to the forum!

I'll begin backwards by addressing your last question first. Indeed, "the only" is always immediately followed by a sufficient condition (unlike "only if," which introduces a necessary condition). For instance:

The only way to eat Oreos is to forget what's in them.

Eat Oreos Forget

(Contrapositive: Remember Don't eat Oreos)

The only people who never fail are those who never try.

Never fail Never try

(Contrapositive: Sometime try Sometime fail)

So, the statement "The only alternative is subsidy" means that if there is any alternative (to making money), it will require subsidy:

Alternative Subsidy

Now, let's think about this stimulus holistically. In the first two sentences, the author tells us that the press needs to make money to survive:

Survive Make money (i.e. profit-making)

In the third and fourth sentences, we learn that there is an alternative to making money: if the press were not profit-making, it would require subsidy. When the author says that "the only alternative is subsidy," you need to think about what this means in the context of the previous sentence: the only alternative to what? To making money, of course. In other words, if the press were NOT profit-making, it would need subsidy to survive:

NO profit-making Subsidy

If I recall the stimulus correctly, the author goes on to say that no one would subsidize honest journalism, meaning that if the press were to receive subsidies, it will not produce honest journalism:

NO profit-making Subsidy NO honest journalism

The contrapositive of this chain likely validates the correct answer choice:

Honest journalism NO subsidy Profit-making

Does this help? Let me know.

Thanks

[Echx73]

TeamPowerScore,

I am going through the PowerScore LSAT LR Question Type Training Volume 1 book. I am only able to see an explanation for the answer selection, just which answer is correct. I know going through every answer would take way too much of your time, so I will just ask a few.

MBT Page 34 Q#46 The correct answer is D. The answer states " to produce honest journalism, it must be a profit-making institution." I feel I cannot prove this for the information in the stimulus. Can you walk me through this question please?

Sincerely, I thank you so much for your help!

Eric

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hey Eric,

The stimulus contains conditional relationships, and so the conclusion can be formally deduced from them. The relevant relationships can be diagrammed as follows:

The press has to make money to survive.

Surive Make money

If the press were not profit-making, the only alternative is subsidy and, with it, outside control.

NOT make money Subsidy

No one will subsidize honest journalism

Honest journalism NO subsidy

Using the contrapositive of the second relationship relationship, we can combine the last two into the following conditional chain:

Honest journalism NO subsidy Make money

This prephrase agrees with answer choice (D).

Does that make sense?

Thanks!