#22 - Economist: Gifts of cash or gift cards, which allow

[Raptorfan1526]

I have a somewhat related question in relation to this one. So for me, with weaken questions like this, the correct answers aren't so apparent and I don't think its a stretch to say that the test makers designed this question and others like it this way.

My question is what are the test makers trying to test us on with questions like this? Obviously they want to see if we can weaken an argument but for harder strengthen and weaken questions, they seem to require more attention to detail. Is that what these harder questions are designed to do?

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Raptorfans,

In harder questions like this one, you might find that they are trying to make sure you can distinguish between relevant and irrelevant facts. This is a pretty clear analog to what typical law practice requires. You have to be able to distinguish between documents and facts that are relevant for your case or irrelevant. You need to be able to see an recognize things that aren't automatically obviously relevant. Understanding how different facts will impact an argument is somewhat of a critical skill for lawyers.

Having gone through law school and some years of legal practice, I can tell you that the skills tested on the LSAT are pretty relevant skills. It may not seem like it as you go through this process, but the work you are putting in now to understand and learn these skills will help you in your education and beyond.

Hope that helps.

[Raptorfan1526]

Great! Thank you so much

[mkarimi73]

A couple questions here.

1) Is this a valid pre-phrase to this question?: "The study only accounts for the value recipients give for gifts chosen by others. How does this study provide any information on the value they give for gift cards/cash?" Thus, I was tempted by (C) because I thought this answer choice questioned the relevance of the studied cited. Now after reading the forum, the better pre-phrase would have concerned the issue of: "What is value? Are we talking 'cash' value, 'intrinsic' value...? Are we talking about value of purchasing the item vs. selling the item?"

2) How is the contrapositive of (D) triggered by the stimulus?

Thanks in advance!

[Adam Tyson]

I think that prephrase misses the mark, maxim, because the value of an amount of cash or a gift card should be equal to the actual amount. How much is $50 cash worth? It's worth $50. I think a better prephrase might be "there are other ways to measure value because what you would pay for something." If the study failed to consider alternatives ways of measuring that might give different results, the argument based on that study is undermined.

I'm not sure what you mean about the stimulus triggering the contrapositive. The answer is a conditional statement, but the contrapositive is not the issue. If it is true that people are unwilling to sell those gifts unless offered much more than they cost, that is evidence of an alternative form of measurement of value - what you would sell for rather than what you would pay. It might have cost the giver $50, and I would have paid only $35, but if I won't sell it for less than $75 then it looks like I value it more than I would have valued $50 in cash.

[mkarimi73]

Ok that helps. Thank you for that! Essentially, (D) is a much stronger answer than (C) because it still questions the relevance of the study cited by indicating that that: "hey man, there are other types of value, such as selling the gifts you were given by others." What an interesting test!