Essayist: Winners of a Nobel prize for science, who are typically prof

From MGMT LSAT Forum:
"All Nobel prize winners have made science contributions.
Nobel prize winners are typically professional scientists (PS).
Some amateur scientists (AS) have made science contributions.
PS are often motivated by econ. nec. or desire for fame.
AS are motivated only by love of discovery.

(C) is fully supported. Since some science contributions have been made by AS, and AS are always motivated by only the love of discovery, it must be true that some science contributions have been motivated by the love of discovery!


The incorrect answers:
(A) We know that some AS made contributions to science - but we don't know whether they won Nobel prizes! What if all of the AS who contributed to science won Nobels? Then all of the AS who didn't win Nobels would not have contributed to science!

(B) There are two problems here. Nobels are typically won by PS, and PS are often motivated by economics/fame. We can't link these statements! If strawberries are typically red, and red things are often cars, that does not mean that strawberries are typically cars.

Additionally, we know PS are often motivated by economics/fame, but that doesn't necessarily mean those PS aren't in some part by love of discovery too - just that they aren't motivated by it exclusively.

(D) While we don't know the number of the AS and the PS, what's more important is that we don't know the relative significance of their overall contributions. Even if there was just one AS ever who contributed to science, it's possible that his single contribution was more important than all the PS's contributions combined!

(E) There's no information about the love of discovery making anyone more likely to make a contribution.


You ask what we can infer about the PS, and the answer is: very little! We know some have won Nobel prizes, and some are motivated by economics/fame, and that's about it. Remember that the LSAT doesn't just want you to find answers, it also wants you to know where there are no answers! There's nothing much to know here about the PS!"

(A) Some amateur scientists who did not win a Nobel prize for science nevertheless made significant contributions to science.
- We don't know how many, if any, amateur scientist actually win or did not win the Nobel Prize. Also, we don't know to what extent Amateur Scientist" and "made significant contibution" groups overlap.

(B) Typically, winners of a Nobel prize for science are not motivated at all by the love of discovery.
- Not necessary. It may be possible that many professional scientist who won Nobel were motivated by the love of discovery.

(C) The love of discovery is the motive behind many significant contributions to science.
- CORRECT.
= amateur scientists have also provided many significant contributions + amateur scientists are motivated by the love of discovery alone

(D) Professional scientists have made a greater overall contribution to science than have amateur scientists.
- Not necessarily true.

(E) A professional scientist is more likely to make a significant contribution to science if he or she is motivated by the love of discovery.
- This cannot be inferred.

Answer C.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.