- Tue Feb 23, 2021 2:08 pm
#84397
Your analysis of D is good, Albert! "Not precisely determined" is too weak and vague for it to do any damage, and so it does not, by itself, hurt the argument. The author could still respond with "fine, we need to figure that bit out, but we should still do this because it works." And changing answer D the way you suggested would make it a good weaken answer, because it would be a strong counter to the claim that we should expand the program.
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam