48 LR Two Question 21
- « 48 LR Two Question 20
- 1175 of 3815
- 48 LR Two Question 22 »
Comments
Question 1: How did you decide when reading the passage that you could simplify the first sentence into: L --> NOT Sincere?
Question 2. How did you know when you first read it that traditional norms and ignoring unpleasant realities were not important?
I took a long time with my chain, because I was trying to figure out how to link 'ignore unpleasant realities IUR' (contra = face unpleasant realties), and 'tell small lies TSL' (contra = be honest). I got this:
Succ --> Trust --> NOT TSL --> NOT IUR --> Sincere -> NOT Traditional Norms
I picked C because I got the Trust --> Sincere link right. But I don't fully understand.
1. I just chose abbreviations that were meaningful to me. Telling lies and ignoring realities prevent sincerity, so that was the core of my abbreviation.
2. Because it's not missing from the argument; that phrase is present in both the evidence and the conclusion. It's the same theory as the one that allows us to manipulate algebraic equations by performing the same operation to both sides (so you can simplify 8x = 4y by dividing both sides by 4. In essence, the 4 on the right side doesn't matter because it's present on both sides).So I just shortened "tell small lies and ignore..." to "L". Does that make sense?
Line up the conclusion so you can see the gap:
We're trying to get from Success to Not Lying, and here's the evidence we have:
Success requires Trust . . . Sincerity requires Not Lying
If you say that Trust requires Sincerity, you've completed the chain!
I thought because the first sentence includes “by requiring” L is a necessary condition. I don’t know why L is a sufficient condition.
Norms require Lying; L is a necessary condition for maintaining social norms.
But what we're interested in here is Sincerity. L is what causes the prevention of Sincerity. Causes are always sufficient conditions (and sometimes also necessary!).