Q6 - People who listen to certain

[peg_city]

Why is D right here and B wrong? Thanks

Is B not a 'consequence?'

[timmydoeslsat]

Why is D right here and B wrong? Thanks

Is B not a 'consequence?'

I viewed this question stem of "a consequence of the view above is that" as asking as what we can infer.

The stimulus says that people who listen to certain recordings of music are in danger of being excessively influenced by spoken messages that have been recorded backwards.

Hard to really predict what this one can be.

Answer choices:

A) Must it be louder? I see no evidence of this. Couldn't it be the same level or slightly lower?

B) Do we have to preserve all of the musical qualities? These are certain recordings. Maybe a guy keeps listening to a CD that his friend burned for him, but the CD sounds pretty bad. Couldn't people still be influenced by these messages? Yes.

C) A false dichotomy presented to us. Must it be that it is especially popular or induces a trancelike state? Maybe a friend just wants to fool around with his buddy.

D) A conditional statement.

If these messages must be comprehended to exert influence ---> must be able to comprehend spoken messages recorded backwards

This is something that must be true!

Try thinking about showing how this is necessary. We can do this by showing that the sufficient can live without the necessary. Lets see what happens and if it makes sense in the argument.

Even if these messages must be comprehended to exert influence, people do not have to be able to comprehend spoken messages recorded backwards

As you can see, the stimulus falls apart when you negate this. If the messages must be comprehended to exert influence, how could you not comprehend the spoken messages? It is impossible!

E) Too general. When people listen to recorded music? I know I do not pay full attention when I listen to recorded music. This does not limit our scope to the certain music recordings.

[demetri.blaisdell]

Great explanation, timmydoeslsat. This question is difficult because you get so little up front. (D) is a tough answer choice because it gives us additional conditional information and applies it.

Let me know if you have any follow up questions.

Demetri

[ty]

Demetri: I understood the stimulus to mean "NOT" influenced. I think I may be"assuming" which in this case may not be a good idea. With my assumption I interpreted "E" as a consequence of one paying full attention. NOt sure if this makes sense. But I was stuck between D and E. At the same time noting that the test makers have a tendency to place the best possible answers back to back. I noticed in the previous post you referenced a modifier "certain". NOt sure if that relates to "Must" in D or not. I was trying to find a connection or some type of match in order to identify the correct answer.

My goal here is clear understanding. Which I dont have because this question has me VERY confused. Also, I havent seen questions like this much on LSATS.

Thanks,

Ty

[ohthatpatrick]

Hey, Ty.

"unduly" kinda means "unfairly", or in this case really "Unknowningly".

Are you familiar with the whole hysteria from the 60's in which parents were worried that teenagers were hearing subliminal Satanic messages recorded backwards on their favorite Beatles / Black Sabbath / Led Zeppelin recordings?

If people were NOT influenced by these hidden messages, they wouldn't use the phrase "are in DANGER of being influenced".

The question stem is definitely a weird wording for Inference, but an Properly Drawn Inference is the same as a Consequence of a given fact or set of statements.

If I say:
"Bob's cat is hungry", a consequence/inference of that is that Bob has a cat.

Pretend these are our answers and ask yourself, "Does this HAVE to be true based on the statement 'Bob's cat is hungry'?"

(A) The cat's hunger must be more intense than any thirst the cat might have.

(B) A cat can be hungry while still maintaining all of its balance/agility.

(C) This cat is hungry either because he was over exercised or underfed this morning.

(D) If cats must be cold to be hungry, then Bob's cat must be cold.

(E) When cats are hungry, all they can think about is food.

Notice that again all the wrong answers (A, B, C, E) just bring in weird speculations that we couldn't prove.

(D) is different because it gives us a new law and an application of that law.

It says if you live in a world in which
"IF cat is hungry, THEN cat is cold"
then you live in a world in which
"Bob's cat is cold".

This is provable, because all we need to know to agree to this conditional is whether or not Bob's cat is hungry. Since we know that, we can safely apply the rule and reach the conclusion that it does.

The word "certain" was nothing interesting/special here. I'm not sure why it was in bold in an earlier post, but there's nothing exciting there.

All you're practicing for Inference questions like these is, "From ONLY the provided facts, can I prove that this answer is a true statement?"

(A) hunger doesn't HAVE to be more intense than thirst
(B) maybe balance/agility ARE threatened.
(C) maybe the cat is hungry for a different reason (tapeworm?)
(E) maybe the cat is only partially fixating on its hunger

None of these counterexamples contradict what we know, so none of the original answers HAD to be true.

(D) must be true, because a rule that says "IF hungry, THEN, cold" would allow us to conclude that Bob's hungry cat is cold.

Hope this helps.