Scientist: Some critics of public

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: irrelevant6% picked this

   The benefits derived from the research project are irrelevant to whether or not its

   When we infer that the critics in the 1st sentence are wrong about what they say, we learn that “funding can be justified, even if we can’t indicate how the funding results in public benefit”. That means that “demonstrating how the public benefits” isn’t necessary. But this answer is saying that it isn’t relevant. That’s much stronger. It’s true to say that a 170+ LSAT score isn’t necessary to get into Harvard. It’s not true to say that a 170+ LSAT score isn’t relevant to getting into Harvard. p.s. Inference questions love to put a wicked trap answer in (A)’s slot. If we have a prediction in our heads, then (A) will try to sound like what we were looking for, but will be broken for some reason. Meanwhile, the correct answer is hiding out in (E) or (D).

   6%
2. B

   Unsupported: Justified8% picked this

   Continued public funding for the research project

   We don’t have any way to prove that funding is or isn’t justified. The conditional provided by "some critics" would be a way to prove that funding isn't justified, but we can't treat their view as fact. In fact that stimulus is actually telling us their view is wrong. But, again, even if we could treat the view of "Some critics" as fact, that rule still only allows one to prove when funding isn't justified. All we have the knowledge to do is say that the critics were wrong to think that justifying funding depends on indicating how it benefits the public. We have the power to say, “That’s not how we determine whether funding is justified.”

   8%
3. C

   Too Strong: surest indication11% picked this

   Public support for the research project is the surest indication of whether or not

   We don’t have any language that tells us which way of justifying funding is the #1 most sure.

   11%
4. D

   Unsupported Causal Relationship: because15% picked this

   There is tremendous public support for the research project because it can be indicated how the public will

   We didn’t read anything causal, so we have no way to derive that public support was caused by the public seeing how they would benefit from the public.

   15%
5. E

   Correct60% picked this

   That a public benefit can be indicated is not a requirement for the justification of the research

   Why this is right

   The 2nd sentence told us that the critics are wrong about what they said in the 1st sentence. This answer is just saying “the thing they said in the 1st sentence is wrong”. The first sentence said that “indicating how the public benefits” is required in order for continued funding to be justified. Since the 2nd sentence told us that the critics were wrong to say this, we can say that “indicating how the public benefits” is not required in order for continued funding to be justified.

   Skill tested: Must be True · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   60%