#21 - Psychologist: Some astrologers claim that our

[maximbasu]

Hi,

My answer was B while the correct answer was C.

I don't understand why B is wrong, it seems plausible.

Additionally, I don't understand why C is correct. How would the geographical difference influence different horoscopes?

Please advise,

Maxim

[Adam Tyson]

Thanks for asking, Maxim. Have you taken a look at our technique for testing answer choices on Assumption questions, the Assumption Negation Technique(TM)? The idea behind that approach is that the correct answer to any assumption question, when negated, will always destroy the argument, either by directly attacking the conclusion or by undermining all of its support from the premises.

When we apply that test here to answer B, we get something like "cultural differences could explain their different personalities". Does that destroy the argument that personality is not completely determined by horoscope? Not at all - in my opinion it actually strengthens it! If culture can determine personality, then horoscope cannot be solely responsible, right?

Now apply that same test to answer C. What if the fact that they were born in two different places resulted in different horoscopes? Now our psychologist's argument goes up in smoke - it could very well be that horoscope IS the controlling factor, and with different horoscopes you would actually EXPECT those two people to have different personalities. Since the negation of C wrecks the argument, then C must be an assumption of the argument. The psychologist must have believed those two people had the same horoscope, despite their geographical separation, and it was that assumption that led him to declare that the astrologers' claims were false.

Assumption questions are cited as the hardest type to deal with by most of my students. I think that it may be due in part to the requirement to get into the author's head rather than into his words. It may also have something to do with difficulties negating the answer choices, or the counter-intuitive nature of wrecking the argument with the right answer. Whatever the cause of those difficulties, the good news is that we have this awesome test that always works. Most questions don't have such a foolproof method of attacking them. Once you get used to using this technique (only on your contenders, if you have more than one - never on all five answers and never if you have only one contender and you are happy with it), you should find these questions to be much, much easier to deal with.

Good luck!

[maximbasu]

Thanks Adam, it all makes sense now. I appreciate it!

Maxim

[gen2871]

I would like to recap this question so that I know for sure I have a solid understanding on this question if you don't mind reading my nonsense one more time.

Some astrologers: horoscopes completely determine personalities.
Psychologist: nope, it doesn't. because ppl born 40 years apart have different personalities.

Answer choices: B. if negated, individuals can be explained by the cultural differences would strengthen psychologist's statement.

C. geographical differences did result the two individuals have different different horoscopes. If different horoscopes, sure will result in different personalities. hence the psychologist's reasoning will fall apart because the premise doesn't lead to the conclusion that horoscopes do not completely determine personalities. The example of 40 year apart birth records does nothing to support the conclusion. hence it is the correct answer choice. right?

Thank you! You people are all marvelous!

[Adam Tyson]

A couple things here, gen:

1. My original answer had a typo in it, and you correctly caught it. Yes indeed, the psychologists are arguing that horoscope does NOT determine personality, and the negation of B, negated, strengthens that by offering an alternate cause for the differences. I have corrected that typo and inserted a "not" into my explanation. Thanks for asking and helping me fix that!

2. The example in the stimulus isn't about two people born 40 years apart, but 40 years AGO on the same date but in different places. They were separated by geography, but occurred at the same time. Other than that, your analysis is perfect! Answer C must be assumed by the author, because if it was not true then horoscope could still be the defining factor. The negation makes the example of the two people being born at the same time in different places irrelevant, removing all of the psychologist's evidence and thus ruining their argument.

Nice job!

[gen2871]

HAHAHAHA