#4 - Warner: Until recently, most competitive swimmers were

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[whitney96lor]

Hi! I would love to know why the answer choices B and D were incorrect. I got the correct answer, which was E, however, this is one of those questions where I was unsure.

Thought process:
My prediction before readings Young's response was that there are definitely more reasons than just the training. Then, I read young's response and thought the reason why they are in the sport longer is because there's an incentive behind it. Therefore, Young is providing a counter.

When I looked at:
A) no. wrong, he doesn't.
B) He does not intend to weaken any of his arguments here is her? He's just saying that there's another reason.
C) that isn't actually true here.
D) whenever I see an answer choice that says 'presupposes' I think that they are meaning -- that the author/speaker is guessing the truth of the conclusion or assuming it is true. Which, Y says "not necessarily".
E) Y does provide an alternative, but what's the difference between that and the counter example answer choice?

What was wrong with those answer choices? (i.e too strong/narrow?) Was my TP correct?

Thank you for the help!

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Whitney!

Answer choice (A) is basically saying that Young points out that Warner's argument results in an internal contradiction (meaning his premises contradict his conclusion). You are correct that Young does not do this.

Answer choice (B) says that Young provides a counterexample to weaken Warner's conclusion. A "counterexample" is a specific example that runs counter to a claim. If Young had provided a counterexample, he would have had to give an example of a specific swimmer who stayed in shape while using the older training regimens of the past. Or one who used the newer regimens but didn't stay in shape. Young doesn't provide an example of a specific swimmer that runs counter to Warner's claim.

Answer choice (C) says that Young points out a conditional reasoning flaw in Warner's argument. Warner doesn't use conditional reasoning, and Young doesn't point out a conditional reasoning flaw.

Answer choice (D) says that Young points out that Warner is using circular reasoning ("presupposes the truth of that conclusion" is common language the LSAT authors use to describe circular arguments--arguments in which the author's premise and conclusion are basically the same, e.g. "I must not be lying because I am telling the truth."). Warner does not use circular reasoning and Young does not suggest that he uses circular reasoning.

Answer choice (E) is correct, because as you said, Young offers an alternate explanation as to why contemporary competitive swimmers are continuing well beyond their university years. Essentially, Warner has provided a causal argument. He has observed an effect (contemporary swimmers swimming longer than swimmers in the past) and concluded a cause (better training regimens). Young points out an alternate cause (swimming today can be a full time job).

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey