jgutella
Thanks Received: 0
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 7
Joined: March 08th, 2014
 
 
 

Q3 - Space programs have recently suffered several setbacks

by jgutella Sun May 25, 2014 6:28 pm

I'm not sure why but I feel as if I always get bogged down by "easy" questions such as this one. I chose (B) because I thought maybe it said something about how having small projects would be just as able as large projects to be revised, edited, etc. and therefore could contribute to a reason as to why they would be a viable alternative. I guess the premise-conclusion alludes to a relationship in terms of money and that's why (C) is correct?
(C) just seemed to be too abstract and basic that it threw me off. Any help here appreciated!
User avatar
 
ohthatpatrick
Thanks Received: 3808
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 4661
Joined: April 01st, 2011
 
 
 

Re: Q3 - Space programs have recently suffered several setbacks

by ohthatpatrick Wed May 28, 2014 3:11 pm

Don’t ever feel bad for struggling with a lower numbered question. :)
1. Difficulty is subjective. There might be "˜harder’ problems that you think aren’t that bad.
2. Even though "on the whole" the early ones are easier, there are still going to be hard ones early on.

I don’t love this problem myself. (I sometimes wonder if LSAT has tightened up its standards a bit since these Superprep tests)

Question Type: Strengthen

Argument core:
Lotsa $$$ lost recently on large projects "”> abandon large in favor of small

Looking at that argument core, what do we need to assume in order to go from "we lost a bunch of $ on LARGE" to "let’s do SMALL instead of LARGE"?

First of all, who’s this SMALL character I haven’t heard anything about until the conclusion?
(new ideas in the conclusion will almost ALWAYS be in the correct answer)

We must be assuming that SMALL projects aren’t just as likely, or even more likely, to lose a bunch of $.

We might also be assuming that we recently lost $$ on the LARGE project because it was LARGE, and not due to some totally unrelated reason that shouldn’t be any knock against LARGE projects.

(A) This doesn’t filter in any way between small and large, and the whole point of the conclusion is to have a preference for one over the other. Eliminate.

(B) This looks better. It’s a comparison between small/large. Does this show an advantage of SMALL, a reason why we should prefer it? No, it says that small is just as easy to revise as large. That’s not an advantage; that places them on equal footing. We might keep this only in the sense that is RULES OUT any objection that "large projects are easier to revise".

(C) This looks better than (B). It’s again a comparison between small/large, but it actually tells us that Small is better. Keep it and eliminate (B).

(D) This looks decent. It’s a comparison that says Small is better. Keep it.

(E) This is a comparison, but it’s not clear whether Small or Large is better. They each have an advantage and disadvantage. Eliminate.

So how do we choose between (C) and (D), the two answers that actually gave us a reason to prefer Small?

I’d ask myself a couple questions:
- Which one is stronger, more compelling?
- Which one better relates to the argument core, to the reasoning above?

(D) is only talking about what project managers prefer. They’re just one part of a project. Maybe people working on the projects prefer large projects. It’s hard to make the preference of project managers seem all-important.

(C) is talking about the fate of the entire project, so it’s much stronger and more compelling. Also, it relates more to the reasoning, since the premise was about losing money. Hence, financial losses are clearly a motivating concern.

(C) is correct

I’m trying to figure out what it was about (C) you found more abstract. Comparing (B) to (C), they both just generalize about small vs. large.

(B) ranks them in terms of "how easy to revise/scrap"
(C) ranks them in terms of "how likely to fail and lose money"

The most important wording we should be considering whenever our conclusion is comparative, e.g. "large should be abandoned in favor of small", is whether each answer choice offers a comparison that tilts in favor of our conclusion.

Hope this helps.
 
jgutella
Thanks Received: 0
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 7
Joined: March 08th, 2014
 
 
 

Re: Q3 - Space programs have recently suffered several setbacks

by jgutella Thu May 29, 2014 3:18 pm

Thank you so much! That clears it up. It looks like I was trying to read too much into the problem when it was pretty straightforward: small> large..but why?

I thought (c) was abstract because it's saying "small projects are better than big projects" basically. It doesn't really relate to specifics in the passage besides "projects" which is pretty broad.

And your right, (b) does that too. I guess (B) just seemed to have something to do with the revision type stuff in the conclusion. Anyway, my reasoning was flawed haha.

Thanks again.