#13 - Nations that have little interaction with one another

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Must Be True, Fill in the Blank. The correct answer choice is (B).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[srcline@noctrl.edu]

Hello

So, I picked the correct a.c. on this one but I want to make sure my reasoning was correct, as I was caught in between A and B.
Okay so, the question stem states asks us to see which a.c most logically completes the argument, so this is a main point question.

A is incorrect because we cant infer from the stimulus that nations that have knowledge one another's needs and problems will treat each other with sympathy and justice. The stimulus is about little interaction, not whether countries are in each others business.

So B is the correct answer because the first sentences establishes that nations that have little interactions with one another, will find it difficult to extend sympathy and justice.

Thankyou
Sarah

[Adam Tyson]

Good work, Sarah, although I should point out that this isn't really a Main Point question but rather a Must Be True question. Same family, slightly different analysis. Most, but not all, fill in the blank questions are Must Be True, where we have evidence in the stimulus to support adding the new item to finish it. It may add a conclusion to the stimulus, but it's not the main point of the stimulus because it's not provided in the stimulus. Minor distinction, probably won't affect your approach all that much, and that's okay.

Your analysis is good, but to shore it up try looking at it conditionally. Our stimulus sets up a conditional chain, where certain things are necessary in the presence of other things. If you diagram it you will find that answer A is a mistaken negation of the conditional claims in the stimulus, while answer B is a valid contrapositive.

Nicely done! Keep up the good work!

[LustingFor!L]

Can you diagram the conditional reasoning for this problem and the contrapositive giving us correct answer choice B?

Thank you!

[Adam Tyson]

First sentence:

LA (Little Interaction) -> UNP (not understand needs and problems)

Second sentence:

SJ (Sympathy and Justice) -> UNP

Chain inference, connecting those two through the contrapositive:

SJ -> UNP -> LA

or

LA - UNP -> SJ

It's this latter chain that matches up with answer B.

On the next one, Lusting, try that on your own and see how it goes. Words like "depends on" means "makes necessary". "Nations that have..." is the same as saying "If a nation has...".

Keep at it, you'll get there!

[oops27]

So without is not always a part of the unless equation? In this instance, "without some interaction" is the sufficient condition or LA in the diagram? Thanks powerscore!

Sorry to keep bugging you with this, but I still can't diagram answer choice B in a way that is consistent with Adam's diagram. Answer choice B says, "without some interaction, nations are bound to find it difficult to extend sympathy and justice to one another." I think that I'm having trouble with the 'bound to find it difficult to,' part. Why is this diagram wrong?

SJ (slash)--->interaction...(I think SJ (slash)= nations are bound to find it difficult to NOT extend sympathy and justice---which (I think) essentially means---if nations extend sympathy and justice, then they have some interaction. Thanks powerscore!

[AthenaDalton]

So without is not always a part of the unless equation? In this instance, "without some interaction" is the sufficient condition or LA in the diagram? Thanks powerscore!

"Without" works the same way as "unless." So whatever term is modified by "without" becomes the necessary condition, and the remaining term is negated and becomes the sufficient condition.

[oops27]

First sentence:

LA (Little Interaction) -> UNP (not understand needs and problems)

Second sentence:

SJ (Sympathy and Justice) -> UNP

Chain inference, connecting those two through the contrapositive:

SJ -> UNP -> LA

or

LA - UNP -> SJ

It's this latter chain that matches up with answer B.

I'm confused. How can the second chain match up to answer choice B? Answer choice b says, "without some interaction, nations are bound to find it difficult to extend sympathy and justice to one another." If I'm understanding the unless equation correctly, answer choice B should be represented as---

Sufficient Necessary

nations are NOT bound to find it difficult to extend sympathy and justice... some interaction

I think that answer choice B matches up to the first chain. I think that "nations are NOT bound to find it difficult to extend sympathy and justice" means essentially "if nations extend sympathy and justice, then knowledge, then not a little interaction (could not a little interaction= some interaction?) Where am I messing up? Thanks powerscore admin!

[Eric Ockert]

Hey oops!

It might be easier just to shorthand "little interaction" to Interaction. This would make the first sentence look like:

Interaction Understand

Therefore, the first chain Adam mentioned above could be diagrammed as:

SJ Understand Interaction

and the second chain:

Interaction Understand SJ



Then, using the Unless Equation, answer choice (B) could be diagrammed as:

SJ Interaction

This is just connecting the relationship across the first chain.

Part of the difficulty in this question is that, unlike most conditional relationships, these are not truly absolute relationships. They use phrases like "little interaction", "little knowledge", "depend largely", and "find it difficult to extend sympathy and justice." However, since we only have to find what most logically completes the argument, these less-than-absolute statements can give us enough to support the relationships in answer choice (B).

[lunsandy]

Hi Powerscore,

I see why B is the correct answer because it provides SJ I for our SJ NP I chain. But, I am struggling to see why E is incorrect. Isn't "only nations that have some interaction with one another have knowledge of one another's needs and problems diagramed" as NP I. So shouldn't that be consistent our chained logic?