#11 - Many of the presidents and prime ministers who have

[smile22]

Hello,

I incorrectly answered D. Is this answer incorrect because although "an acute political sense, a disciplined temperament, and a highly developed ability to absorb and retain information" can lead to a successful foreign policy, they are not necessary attributes as this answer choice claims? Having these attributes can only enhance the probability (more so than prior experience can) of having a successful foreign policy but aren't necessary.

After reading the stimulus again, I inferred two things:

1.) a president and prime minister can have prior experience without being successful in foreign policy, which shows that having prior experience does not guarantee success. So, having prior experience is not sufficient.

2.) a president and prime minister can be successful in foreign policy without having prior experience, which shows that prior experience is not necessary for success.

Based on the reasoning above, prior experience neither sufficient or necessary to be successful in foreign policy. Is this the thinking that I should have taken to select answer B?

[Steve Stein]

Hi,

You are correct on all counts. "Necessary," as you allude to, is too bold a claim to be supported by the stimulus, and as for the right answer, as you properly point out, the first example provided by the author shows that experience is not necessary, and the second reflects the fact that experience is not sufficient.

Nice work!

Steve

[smile22]

Thank you!

[kristinaroz93]

To see things better I would like to add in some diagramming aspects: I think the stimulus is knocking down these two diagrammed beliefs without explicity stating them, so I thought I would.

1)In order to have successful foreign policies--> you need prior experience

But the first sentence shows that many prime misnisters who had the msot successful foreign policies did not in fact have prior experience, so prior experience is shown to not a neccessary condition.

2) prior experience ---> successful foreign policy

However, the last sentence says that prior experience is of little value without those 3 traits. So you can have prior experience and not have a successful foreign policy, which leads us to believe that prior experience s not sufficient for a successful foreign policy.

And d is wrong because those 3 attributes are actually sufficient conditions.

Was this a correct way to approach the problem?

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Hi Kristina,

I'm a bit confused by your diagramming here. But you are correct that prior experience is not sufficient or necessary, and that the three listed attributes are sufficient but not necessary.

[Johnclem]

Hello,
I had a question specifically about diagraming this one. I see stament 3 to be a misataken reversal /negation of statement 2. I understand this is a must be true question and I am not to evaluate the argument but I just want to perfect my diagraming skills.

1- successful policies <SOME> had no experience

2- discipline & ability to retain and absorb information --> successful policies

3- if you don't have discipline & ability to retain and absorb information --> prior experience little help

A) wrong : no info on this
B) correct: we see this from the statements above ( premise 1 and 3)
C)wrong: we don't see this anywhere . In fact it's opposite of what we are looking for.
D) wrong: they are each sufficient condition.
E)wrong: we established that experience is not necessary.


Thanks John

[Claire Horan]

Hi John,

The notes/diagrams you supplied represent a good start, but it would be even more valuable if your sufficient/necessary diagrams related to each other more obviously. Other times, a diagram isn't as easy, but you can use sufficient and necessary in a sentence. Here are my diagrams so you can see what I mean:

"Many of the presidents and prime ministers who have had the most successful foreign policies had no prior experience in foreign affairs when they assumed office." + "In fact, prior experience alone will be of little value to a foreign policymaker who lacks all three of these traits."

Prior experience in foreign affairs is neither necessary nor sufficient for presidents and prime ministers to have successful foreign policies.


"...anyone with an acute political sense, a disciplined temperament, and a highly developed ability to absorb and retain information can quickly learn to conduct a successful foreign policy."

Original statement: Have APS AND DT AND HDAARI QLCSFP

Your reasoning for eliminating (D) is wrong. The three are cumulatively sufficient, but the stimulus doesn't tell us that they are each sufficient.

Contrapositive: QLCSFP APS OR DT OR HDAARI



"In fact, prior experience alone will be of little value to a foreign policymaker who lacks all three of these traits"

APS AND DT AND HDAARI prior experience not helpful/sufficient

[jrc3813]

How do we know that an acute political sense, disciplined temperament, and highly developed ability to retain information are sufficient? The fact that it is says "can" leads me to think they are not sufficient collectively. If they were sufficient wouldn't possessing these traits guarantee success? And as far as not being neccassary conditions, does it just rest on the fact that it says "can" instead of saying that these traits are "required"? I think whenever the word "can" is introduced it confuses things.

[Francis O'Rourke]

Hi JRC,

That’s a good question. I believe that Claire was being concise above and skipping over that one term “can.” If you’d like, you can add that into the diagram so that

Have APS AND DT AND HDAARI QLCSFP

Becomes

Have APS AND DT AND HDAARI ability to QLCSFP

Those traits are sufficient for having the ability to quickly learn to conduct successful foreign policy. However, this distinction does not make any difference for selecting the right answer for the question at hand.

I can recall questions in which it is necessary to see that the speaker is referring to an ‘ability to’ instead of a certainty, but this is not one of them. If the inclusion of “can” confuses you in the future, I would recommend simply adding “ability to” for similar statements.

[Sophia123]

Hi,

I selected D for this question, and in reading Claire's response above I understand that this is incorrect because all three of the characteristics (acute political sense, disciplined temperament and developed ability to absorb and retain information) are together sufficient rather than necessary.

However, in figuring out why A is the correct answer, I was able to diagram the first sentence as NOT prior experience --> successful foreign policies, which means that prior experience is not sufficient. I do not see which sentence indicates that prior experience is not necessary.

Thank you in advance for your help!

Sophia