Q18 - Editorial: It is clear that

[jm.kahn]

I saw the earlier post about mshermann, and thought I'd post why D is indeed a correct credited choice.
A poster previously has already mentioned this I think.

Stim says: Propaganda (P) is nothing but an attempt to influence behavior through repetition of slogans (AIBTRS)

This means P and AIBTRS are interchangeable and one and the same thing. Given that, if Health education (HE) is usually AIBTRS, then clearly HE is usually P.
How can "nothing but" in the above mean anything else other than P = AIBTRS? So it clearly proves the conclusion.

I have a question though of my own. The stim is interesting in that the last sentence is "Sadly however propaganda is much more successful than education". What role does it play in the argument: a premise, a conclusion?
It doesn't support the first sentence in the stim and has no real connection in the argument to the first sentence, but it does seem to depend on premises related to education and propaganda in the middle of the stim. So it's one of the two final (not intermediate) conclusions that the argument has? Or is it something else?

Hey Timmy, nice work! Please don't think I'm suggesting you don't know what you're doing, because you clearly do... But in this case I think I disagree.

Here's why... I looked up the question you referenced:

PT27, S1, Q20 - A poem is any work of art that exploits musical characteristics of language

So, we're defining what a poem is, so we would know that:

P ---> AEM

Notational Key: P - poem, AEM - artwork that exploits musical characteristics of language

But the definition uses the word "any." This means that if something is an artwork that exploits musical characteristics of language, then it's a poem:

AEM ---> P

And so the biconditional is absolutely correct here. But in

PT43, S2, Q18 - It is clear that what is

we don't have a term providing the same function as the word "any" from your example.

Does that make sense why you get a biconditional in one case, but not in the other. The LSAC is very careful with language. So to continue your example of the triangle, I think a better way to phrase the biconditional might be

"A triangle is any polygon with exactly 3 sides."

Triangle <--> Exactly 3 sides

What do you think?

[PhoebeL747]

I agree the fact that there's a "solely" in answer (D) makes the conclusion follows logically since it met the two criteria for being a propaganda: (1) attempts to influence behavior (2) does so by repeating simplistic slogans, and eliminated the possibility for being education all along.

[AviS649]

If you take the language of the premise to be conditional, that is Propaganda > nothing but repetition of slogans, then surely the answer is an illegal reversal and therefore the credited answer is wrong. I don't believe this was meant to be treated as a conditional. I think it is a simple equation, like P=RS, and in that case P=RS is the same thing as RS=P in most logic systems. Of course one could very well treat this as a conditional due to the language of the stimulus, and so I think a complaint is justified in this case.

[weid247]

I just want to add something here. There are only 4 or 5 questions in the history of the LSAT that I believe I can disprove the credited answer choice. This is one of them.

Evidence:

1. Propaganda and eduction are never the same thing.
2. Propaganda is nothing but an attempt to influence behavior through the repetition of simplistic slogans.
3. Education never involves the repetition of simplistic slogans.

Conclusion:

What is called "health education" is usually propaganda.

If you put this into formal notation...

Evidence

1. P --> ~E
2. P --> RSS
3. E --> ~RSS

Conclusion

HE most> P

(Formal Notation Key: P = propaganda, E = education, RSS = repetition of simplistic slogans, HE = health education)

If we add the correct answer choice (D) the conclusion would not follow for sure, and this is a sufficient assumption question.

HE most> RSS
P ---> RSS
===========
HE most> P

This argument relies on a reversal of the second premise. I'd love to see someone prove me wrong as the LSAC has an outstanding reputation as producing an amazing entrance exam.

P > RRS, how can we get HE most > P
We must get HE most > RRS

Most just same as some, it is different from all, actually it is reverse to all logic. You can understand it clearly by the set graph.

Any problem please counting.