- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 5978
- Joined: Mar 25, 2011
- Thu May 04, 2017 11:57 am
#34521
Complete Question Explanation
Assumption. The correct answer choice is (C).
This is a classic LSAT question, and certainly worth studying closely to better understand the nature of how assumptions work on the LSAT.
The stimulus indicates that J.J. Thomson trained many physicists who won prestigious awards and positions. On that basis alone, the argument concludes that "skills needed for creative research can be taught and learned."
The question you must ask yourself here is: does the premise prove the conclusion? Is it the case that because these people studied with J.J. and won awards that he was the one who taught them the skills, thus showing that the skills can be taught?
As always with Assumption questions, something has been taken for granted, and you must identify that statement, and per usual it will be one that the author is absolutely committed to in order for everything to add up properly. In this case, the Assumption Negation Technique is quite helpful.
Answer choice (A): While this seems to make some sense initially, is it absolutely the case that this must be true in order for the author's argument to make sense? No, and the easiest route to eliminating this answer is that we have no idea that "scientists came from all over the world to work with him" nor does that play any role in reaching the conclusion. Maybe the only people J.J. worked with were from his surrounding area. If that is the case, nothing changes in the argument, and thus this is not an assumption.
Answer choice (B): This is a tricky answer because it has some elements of truth, but then it goes too far with the "all." An easy way to see this answer is incorrect is to negate it, which turns into, "Not all of the scientists..." This would not attack the author's position, and the author would likely respond to that negation by saying, "Right, I didn't think all of them were renowned, just that some of them were."
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. The hole in the argument is that simply because a number of J.J.'s students did well doesn't prove that he taught them to be creative. Maybe every single one of the people coming to him were already creative geniuses. This answer indicates that is not the case, and states that at least one didn't have the creativity. As is often the case when dealing with groups, the negation approach is powerful, and here's the proper negation:
Answer choice (D): This is so specific, do we have any idea that this is the case, or that the author has relied on this particular point in making the argument? It's also an answer that seems somewhat opposite, and when negated ("not necessary" become "necessary"), is a point the author would be more likely to agree with than reject.
Answer choice (E): While this is a point that would support the author's argument, it's not necessary for the conclusion to be true here, since we are focused specifically on J.J. Thomson and whether his situation shows that the creativity can be taught.
This explanation is still in progress.
Assumption. The correct answer choice is (C).
This is a classic LSAT question, and certainly worth studying closely to better understand the nature of how assumptions work on the LSAT.
The stimulus indicates that J.J. Thomson trained many physicists who won prestigious awards and positions. On that basis alone, the argument concludes that "skills needed for creative research can be taught and learned."
The question you must ask yourself here is: does the premise prove the conclusion? Is it the case that because these people studied with J.J. and won awards that he was the one who taught them the skills, thus showing that the skills can be taught?
As always with Assumption questions, something has been taken for granted, and you must identify that statement, and per usual it will be one that the author is absolutely committed to in order for everything to add up properly. In this case, the Assumption Negation Technique is quite helpful.
Answer choice (A): While this seems to make some sense initially, is it absolutely the case that this must be true in order for the author's argument to make sense? No, and the easiest route to eliminating this answer is that we have no idea that "scientists came from all over the world to work with him" nor does that play any role in reaching the conclusion. Maybe the only people J.J. worked with were from his surrounding area. If that is the case, nothing changes in the argument, and thus this is not an assumption.
Answer choice (B): This is a tricky answer because it has some elements of truth, but then it goes too far with the "all." An easy way to see this answer is incorrect is to negate it, which turns into, "Not all of the scientists..." This would not attack the author's position, and the author would likely respond to that negation by saying, "Right, I didn't think all of them were renowned, just that some of them were."
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. The hole in the argument is that simply because a number of J.J.'s students did well doesn't prove that he taught them to be creative. Maybe every single one of the people coming to him were already creative geniuses. This answer indicates that is not the case, and states that at least one didn't have the creativity. As is often the case when dealing with groups, the negation approach is powerful, and here's the proper negation:
- "None of the eminent scientists trained by J. J. Thomson was not a creative researcher before coming to study with him."
Answer choice (D): This is so specific, do we have any idea that this is the case, or that the author has relied on this particular point in making the argument? It's also an answer that seems somewhat opposite, and when negated ("not necessary" become "necessary"), is a point the author would be more likely to agree with than reject.
Answer choice (E): While this is a point that would support the author's argument, it's not necessary for the conclusion to be true here, since we are focused specifically on J.J. Thomson and whether his situation shows that the creativity can be taught.
This explanation is still in progress.
Dave Killoran
PowerScore Test Preparation
Follow me on X/Twitter at http://twitter.com/DaveKilloran
My LSAT Articles: http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/author/dave-killoran
PowerScore Podcast: http://www.powerscore.com/lsat/podcast/
PowerScore Test Preparation
Follow me on X/Twitter at http://twitter.com/DaveKilloran
My LSAT Articles: http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/author/dave-killoran
PowerScore Podcast: http://www.powerscore.com/lsat/podcast/
