TYPE: Sufficient vs Necessary Assumption Quote:
If there are sentient beings on planets outside our solar system, we will not be able to determine this anytime in the near future unless some of these beings are at least as intelligent as humans. We will not be able to send spacecraft to planets outside our solar system anytime in the near future, and any sentient being on another planet capable of communicating with us anytime in the near future would have to be at least as intelligent as we are.
Understand:-we will not be able to send spacecraft
- to communicate, the being would have to be as intelligent.
COCNLUSION : We will NOT be able to determine existence of beings ,UNLESS they are as intelligent as humans
Quote:
The argument’s conclusion can be properly inferred if which one of the following is assumed?
-assumption Q
think :We are told that we cannot send spacecraft and the beings in order to communicate with us would have to be as intelligent . The conclusion is "determine existence of beings" . There is a logical jump here. We are only told that we cant go there and beigns have to be intelligent BUT is that the ONLY WAY TO KNOW THE EXISTENCE?? author makes a jump from inability to travel and beings ability to communicate TO determining existence. WHAT if we can sit at home and with some weird iron man technology can know the existence of beigns (thanos) ?? in this case even if Thanos cannot communicate with us, iron man can still sit at home(without travelling in spacecraft) with some weird technology !! So the author here is assuming that there is
NO OTHER WAY WE CAN DETERMINE EXISTENCE .unless we send a spacecraft or beings are intelligent enough to communicate(BTW hail hydra !)
Also, we are told that beings coomunication and space travel are SUFFICIENT consition for determining existence (result). BUT is that a necessary consdtion?? what if there are other ways too??
Framework (if you cannot prethink an assumprion ) : I want an answer choice which will tell me that there are other ways to determine existence WHEN i negate the ans choices . I want answer chooice which will tell me that given the consitions I CANNOT determine existence.
(Framework analysis will help you in telling WHAT EXACTLY you are looking for.. trust me you want to knwo what you are looking for)
Quote:
A) There are no sentient beings on planets in our solar system other than those on Earth.
-THEN why is author even presenting this argeumnt?? Eliminate
Quote:
(B) Any beings that are at least as intelligent as humans would want to communicate with sentient beings outside their own solar systems.
-What beings want has nothing to do with "determining existence" ... Negate: No beings want to communicate with us. The entire argument goes to a toss. if beings dont want to talk to us then why are we even talking about their intelligent. Additionally, even if any being is interested to talk to us, the conclusion may still break becasue we still have high technology to communicate with them..so we can determine their existence.
Quote:
(C) If there is a sentient being on another planet that is as intelligent as humans are, we will not be able to send spacecraft to the being’s planet anytime in the near future.
- ALREADY mentioned in the passage. Plus : does not talk about determing existence
Quote:
(D) If a sentient being on another planet cannot communicate with us, then the only way to detect its existence is by sending a spacecraft to its planet.
- ASSUMPTION . Please read "think"Quote:
(E) Any sentient beings on planets outside our solar system that are at least as intelligent as humans would be capable of communicating with us.
- We already know this. The premises tell us that "unless they are as intelligent, they cannot communicate"..This ans choice is just reword .
Negation : no sentient beings...as intelligent... would NOT BE capable of communicating !! >> Conclusion is strengthened. a negation must weaken.
HAIL HYDRA !!
close
05 Dec 2018, 09:12
72%
(02:24)
wrong 
