Legislator: University humanities departments

Answer choices

1. A

   Opposite3% picked this

   It is offered as support for the accuracy of an

   The alleged stereotype is that "humanities freeload on science", but the fact that it costs significantly less to teach/research humanities than science goes against that stereotype.

   3%
2. B

   Wrong Role1% picked this

   It is an alleged stereotype rejected in the argument’s

   The alleged stereotype ("the typical characterization") is found in the 3rd sentence. We're being asked about the first claim in the 2nd sentence.

   1%
3. C

   Correct80% picked this

   It is put forward as a component of an explanation for a premise

   Why this is right

   Sure, this is saying that our claim plays a supporting / explanatory role. Given that humanities departments bring in less money than science departments, how could we explain the premise that "humanities departments bring in more money than they spend, whereas science departments spend more than they bring in?" Well, our claim helps to explain that --- teaching and research cost way less in humanities, so even though humanities brings in less revenue, its expenses are low enough that it's still profitable. Part of what may throw people off about this answer is that we might have preferred to say "our claim is a premise that supports an intermediate conclusion". That is true, but unfortunately an intermediate conclusion is both a premise and a conclusion. It's a conclusion because it is supported, but it is a premise because it provides support. On one Role question, they even called an Intermediate Conclusion by the same of "supported premise", whereas what we commonly call "premises" in LSAT class are "unsupported premises".

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

   80%
4. D

   Wrong Role6% picked this

   It is an intermediate conclusion from which the argument’s overall conclusion

   It is not an intermediate conclusion, because no support is provided for it. To test whether something is an intermediate conclusion, we can ask ourselves, "why should we believe _____ ?" Why should we believe that ... teaching and research cost way less in humanities than in the sciences? [crickets] The author didn't provide any reasons why. Reasons why would have sounded like, "After all, humanities teachers usually only have a masters whereas science teachers usually have PhD's, which command higher salaries. Research in humanities involves cheap resources like books, whereas research in science involves expensive resources like telescopes / microscopes / chemistry labs."

   6%
5. E

   Contradicted: independent support10% picked this

   It is one of many claims each presented as independent support for the

   Saying that there are many claims, each presented as independent support for the overall conclusion is in effect denying that there are any Intermediate Conclusions in this argument. From keywords alone we can tell there are two Intermediate Conclusions. Because Claim 1, Claim 2. As a result, Claim 3. Thus, Claim 4. Claims 2, 3, and 4 were all supported conclusions, so it's not correct to say the argument was one big conclusion and a lot of premises: Claim 4. After all, claims 1, 2, and 3.

   10%