LSAT-5-2-3

leeon

In Europe, schoolchildren devote time during each school day to calisthenics. North American schools rarely offer a daily calisthenics program. Tests prove that North American children are weaker, slower, and shorter-winded than European children. We must conclude that North American children can be made physically fit only if they participate in school calisthenics on a daily basis.

Which one of the following is assumed in the passage?

(A) All children can be made physically fit by daily calisthenics.

(B) All children can be made equally physically fit by daily calisthenics.

(C) Superior physical fitness produces superior health.

(D) School calisthenics are an indispensable factor in European children’s superior physical fitness.

(E) North American children can learn to eat a more nutritious diet as well as to exercise daily.

leeon

The answer is D, but anyone can tell me why?

lawyer_1

将D取非，在欧洲小孩较好的体质的影响因素中， School calisthenics 不是必不可少的。则欧洲小孩体质比美国小孩好的原因就不一定 是School calisthenics 。这样 School calisthenics 就不是体质好的必要条件。结论说 School calisthenics 是体质好的必要条件便不能成立。其实该题的结论是带条件的。其假设是充分条件存在，必要条件一定存在或否定使必要条件不存在的因素。

leeon

According to the passage--we must conclude that A(North American children can be made physically fit) only if B(they participate in school calisthenics on a daily basis)--we should prove that B is a sufficient condition to A.So the assumtion must demonstrate that participating in school calisthenics on a daily basis lead to superior physical fitness, namely that, there is a GAP between school calisthenics and physical fitness.

But how to rule out the choice A. If A is not true, we also can not draw the conclusion.

wanze

只要北美和南美孩子能够通过体操健身就可以

并不需A说的全部孩子

leeon

U're right, I do not pay attention to "ALL", the negative of the "all" should be "some"

Thx!

lawyer_1

the negative of "all" is "not all", "some" is "none" .

leeon

"not all" is exactly reverse of the "all". In my opinion, it also can understand to "some".

znlhy

请问All children can be made physically fit by daily calisthenics这句话取非之后

是Not all children can be made physically fit by daily calisthenics

还是 Some children can be made physically fit by daily calisthenics

还是Some children can not be made physically fit by daily calisthenics

谢谢哪位帮助一下

ssssss

Let analysis this problem:

Premise 1: In Europe, schoolchildren devote time during each school day to calisthenics.

Premise 2: North American schools rarely offer a daily calisthenics program.

Premise 3: Tests prove that North American children are weaker, slower, and shorter-winded than European children.

Conclusion: We must conclude that North American children can be made physically fit only if they participate in school calisthenics on a daily basis.

Which one of the following is assumed in the passage?

This is an assumption question, for assumption question you have to bridge between premise and conclusion because there is a missing link. the missin link for this problem is that you have to prove calisthenics is the major reason European schoolchildren are physically fit, not any other reasons. If there is another reason that makes European schoolchildren physically fit, then the conclusion can not stand.

make sure you are focus on the conclusion and be able to find out the conclusion after you read the whole question.

(A) All children can be made physically fit by daily calisthenics.

This is paraphrase one of our premise.

(B) All children can be made equally physically fit by daily calisthenics.

This answear is not related to the question, the argument did not mention any thing related to “equally physically fit”.

(C) Superior physical fitness produces superior health.

This is not related to our question at all. The question never mentioned about superior physical fitness.

(D) School calisthenics are an indispensable factor in European children’s superior physical fitness.

This is the right answear, it excludes other reasons that make sure School calisthenics is the major reason European schoolchildren are physically fit.

If you negate this: “School calisthenics are not an indispensable factor in European children’s superior physical fitness.” Which will weaken the argument a lot that the conclusion can not stand.