lsat-18-1-11

qierliu

11. The situation has gotten worse. Unless Elizabeth goes I must go. But she will not to if I stay So we will both have to go.

What is the flaw in the reasoning above?

(A) The first claim, that the situation has gotten worse, is irrelevant.

(B) A possible course of action is overlooked

(C) It is assumed that staying is the same as not going.

(D) The conclusion refers to a possibility that is not explicitly referred to in any of the premises.

(E) Insufficient information is given about the circumstances.

答案是B，Unless Elizabeth goes I must go怎么理解啊，overlooked 的是哪种 possible course of action

mariezhu

Unless Elizabeth goes I must go：
Elizabeth doesn't go -> I go=>i don't go-> elizabeth goes

she will not to if I stay ：
I stay (don't go) -> Elizabeth doesn't go

A course of action is thus overlooked

iinobscurity

I have a different explantion.
At the end of argument, the author said "So we will both have to go. "
According his  inferment, it is obvious that He overlooked the other action of course :
He can go alone !

Snazzy

Hi, Marie, could u explain what does choice B really mean, pls? thanks.

guihuaqiao

the second possibility is:

neither of them will go

fredshen

I initially selected D.  But then I look again, both go is referred in condition 1. The key is negation of I must go,

Condition 1:

I may not go -> El goes (so it's possible I stay and El goes or I go and El goes)

Condition 2

I stay -> El will not stay (one of us stays)

So basically, all these two are saying either one of us will go and the other stays or both of us could go.   The conclusion overlooked the former one.

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-12-6 4:08:45编辑过]

fredshen

the second possibility is:

neither of them will go

Wrong. see above

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-12-6 4:11:20编辑过]

duckcat

I think

Either both of them may stay or they both go.