Q4 - A strong correlation exists between

[kmewmewblue]

Hi.

I understand why (E) is correct.
But, I cannot eliminate (B) completely.

Something is not clear in this sentence, but I cannot spot it.

[ohthatpatrick]

On Main Conclusion questions, our task is about as simple as it can be:

i. find the conclusion
ii. pick an answer choice that means something equivalent

What's the conclusion here?

It seems to be the last sentence, prefaced by the word "thus". (Normally, on Main Conclusion questions that's too good to be true, but we shouldn't expect this #4 to be TOO hard.)

So we just need to pick the answer that is closest in meaning to the last sentence.

As you pointed out, (B) and (E) seem really close in meaning, so we'll have to figure out how they're different.

They both seem to be attaching 'what people value' to 'how they act', both of which are in our conclusion.

The crucial difference between (B) and (E) seems to be "reliable indicator of" vs. "symptomatic of".

These both assign an implicit chronological ordering to things.

If X is a reliable indicator of Y, then knowing X allows you to predict Y. (X comes first, Y comes second)

One's LSAT score (supposedly) is a reliable indicator of your performance in law school. (LSAT score comes first, law school comes second)

If X is symptomatic of Y, then Y is the cause and X is the effect.

Stress is symptomatic of prepping for the LSAT. LSAT prep is the cause and stress is the effect. (LSAT prep comes first, stress comes second)

So we really have to choose (E) and eliminate (B) because (E) matches the causal/chronological ordering of the conclusion, whereas (B) reverses it.

Hope this helps.

[samuelfbaron]

I got this question correct but initially was tempted by (A). Until I realized that it got it backwards!

My question is this:

Is the first sentence "A strong correlation exists between what people value and the way they act" the conclusion? Or is it the final sentence "Thus, knowing what people value can help on predict their actions".

Or is the first sentence merely background information?

[sumukh09]

The first sentence is used to support the last sentence which is the conclusion of the argument.

[muzzy5412]

why is A wrong

Knowing how people behave allows one to infer what they value.

[ohthatpatrick]

Remember, our task is just to pick an answer that is the closest possible restatement we can get of the conclusion.

What is the conclusion? The last sentence.

"knowing what people value can help one predict their actions"

is (A) a restatement of that idea?

"knowing how people behave allows one to infer what they value"

No, it’s backwards!

The conclusion says that we KNOW what people value, and then we infer/predict how they will act.

(A) says that we KNOW how people behave/act, and then we infer/predict what they value.

It’s no accident that this answer choice was choice (A). After all, if you’re going too fast, you see the structural similarity of "Knowing _____ allows you to predict ___".

(meanwhile, choice E is hidden safely out of sight and uses a different structure to paraphrase the same idea as the conclusion)

[roflcoptersoisoi]

Patrick's explanation for why B is wrong is excellent. Another reason why B is wrong is because it discusses people's claims of what they value, whereas the main point talks about what people value, the two are not necessarily the same and so B can be eliminated on that front as well.

But yeah, like Patrick pointed out B essentially reverses the implicit chronological order of the cause and effect.
The conclusion is essentially saying that people's actions are symptomatic of what they value. B is the reverse of this.