Q25 - To face danger solely because

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Inference (must be true)

Stimulus Breakdown:
Reading for Conditional, Causal, Quantitative, or Comparative wording,
we see a couple conditional claims:
"If you're just facing danger for the thrill, this doesn't count as courage", and
"If something is courageous, it must be that you're overcome the fear involved in pursuing a goal".

Answer Anticipation:
When given multiple conditionals, we try to chain them together. Here, though, both conditionals end with the same idea: "not real courage". We know that "if you're just facing fear for the pleasure of it", it's not real courage. And "if you haven't had to overcome a fear caused by pursuing a goal", it's not real courage. Hard to synthesize those, so the correct answer will probably just apply one of them to a specific scenario. Any answer that tries to prove that something IS real courage is automatically wrong, since the rules provided only let us prove that something is NOT real courage.

Correct Answer:
D

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) Hmm ... Do we know whether this person is overcoming danger in order to attain a goal? Does "avoiding future pain" count as a goal? It probably could.

(B) Nope. Our 2nd principle makes it sound like you CAN experience fear, like overcoming fear as you try to attain your goal could be courageous.

(C) Our rules are about courageous actions, not about courageous people. So there's no way we could label someone "not a courageous person", unless we knew they ONLY ever faced danger for the sake of pleasure.

(D) Yes! This says "if you're not afraid of the danger, then facing danger to benefit others is not acting couragesously". According to our 2nd rule, "if you don't perservere in the face of fear prompted by danger, then it wasn't real courage".

(E) No. What if this person has some unique fears that other people don't have? If this person encounters those fears while trying to attain a goal and perserveres in the face of those fears, then the person might be acting courageously.

Takeaway/Pattern: Both the 2nd sentence and the correct answer require us to have comfort with "only" / "only if", which introduce necessary ideas. Most of the time, these ideas 'click' better when you read them in the contrapositive form. Reading (D) as is probably is not as tempting as reading (D) in the form of "if you weren't afraid of the danger, then you weren't acting courageously", since our rule about real courage was centered on overcoming fear.

#officialexplanation

[zhangstagangsta]

I am wondering if the argument can and should be understood as a conditional statement.

Courage --> person perseveres in the face of fear prompted by danger in acting to attain a goal

The answer is D, but it does not mention that the person perseveres. However, it is the best answer out of the five. A, B and E reverse the relationship between courage and its conditions while C gives another definition (C --> derives pleasure from no dangerous activities).

[aileenann]

I agree that you could think about the conclusion as a conditional statement - very good point. (D) is a good answer despite not using the word "perseveres" because it essentially describes the same situation - here the person "faces danger" which implies that s/he perseveres in facing that danger. Also (D) makes the "only if" relationship between fear and the danger evident as in the original argument. Does that make (D) more acceptable to you? Let me know!

[clarafok]

i see why D is correct but i'm not so clear as to how i would eliminate C. could someone please explain? thanks!

[bbirdwell]

(C) is not supported by the argument. All the argument says is that someone who faces danger solely because there is pleasure is not courageous. The argument says nothing about someone who happens to derive pleasure from danger.

[goriano]

A, B and E reverse the relationship between courage and its conditions

I'm having trouble eliminating A, B, and E and am not sure whether the reason quoted above is valid for eliminating those answer choices. That is, A, B, and E all have ~courage in the necessary position, which I believe is actually able to be inferred based on the two statements. If this is correct, how would one go about getting rid of these answer choices?

I'm also particularly interested in (E) as an attractive answer choice. Would it have been correct if it said "A person who has no fear of situations AT ALL cannot be said to be courageous in any situation." ? I'm thinking yes, because then they wouldn't be persevering in the face of fear (they don't have fear to being with).

[joseph.m.kirby]

This question is a Must Be True; therefore, the answer must be provable via the stimulus.

P1: (face danger solely for pleasure) --> ~courage
P2: C --> acting to attain a goal (perseveres in face of fear/danger)
~acting to attain a goal (perseveres in face of fear/danger) --> ~C

(A) face danger in order to avoid future pain --> ~C
Doesn't have to be true.

(B) experiences fear of some aspects of danger --> ~C
Not necessarily true.

(C) derive pleasure from some dangerous activities --> ~C
Not good enough! We want "face danger solely for pleasure" --> ~C

(D) (faces danger to benefit others) is Courageous --> person is afraid of the danger
Yes! This answer Must Be True.

(E) no fear of the situations everyone else would fear --> ~C
Not necessarily true. What if this person could fear more terrible other dangerous situations and persevere?

[tzyc]

Does the stimulus say about benefiting others?
Or if it's inferable, we do not have to have perfect match?
Thank you.

[timmydoeslsat]

Does the stimulus say about benefiting others?
Or if it's inferable, we do not have to have perfect match?
Thank you.

Thats the beauty of so many inference and MSS question stems.

We know that courage requires acting to attain a goal whereby you continue to push through a fear brought about by danger.

So answer choice D is just bringing in something that can be considered a subset of attaining a goal. This answer choice could have said, "A person who faces danger in order to buy a computer...." and then states the requirement again.

[ferris7]

Is it valid to eliminate answer choice (E) based on the logic that just because a person has no fear of the situations that everyone else fears does not necessarily mean that said person has no fears (i.e., fears that everyone else doesn't fear)?

[jvonscha]

Would (C) be correct if it said, "A person who happens to derive pleasure from all dangerous activities"? Then, there is no way this person could fear a dangerous activity, which is a requirement for doing something courageous. Does this make sense? This is why I originally picked (C). I misread the word "some" in quickly reading it.

[roflcoptersoisoi]

Still don't get why E is wrong

[janetT279]

Still don't get why E is wrong

For example, A has no fear of thing like snakes, height which others would fear (A "has no fear of the situations that everyone else would fear"), but A fears flowers. In that situation, A can be said to be courageous if A perseveres in the face of fear prompted by flowers.

[GolddiggerF208]

Still don't get why E is wrong

I also think (E) is super tempting but finally chose (D). Simply, (E) doesn't mention any danger involving in the situation. We cannot assume a situation that anyone fears must have a danger.