Bunuel
Neural connections carrying signals from the cortex (the brain region responsible for thought) down to the amygdala (a brain region crucial for emotions) are less well developed than connections carrying signals from the amygdala up to the cortex. Thus, the amygdala exerts a greater influence on the cortex than vice versa.
The argument’s conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
(A) The influence that the amygdala exerts on the rest of the brain is dependent on the influence that the cortex exerts on the rest of the brain.
(B) No other brain region exerts more influence on the cortex than does the amygdala.
(C) The region of the brain that has the most influence on the cortex is the one that has the most highly developed neural connections to the cortex.
(D) The amygdala is not itself controlled by one or more other regions of the brain.
(E) The degree of development of a set of neural connections is directly proportional to the influence transmitted across those connections.
EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT
The hole in the logic here is a leap from “well developed neural connections” to “exerts a greater influence.” This doesn’t seem like a huge leap; it seems reasonable to assume that if the brain is really good at sending signals from A to B, but not from B to A, then A will probably exert a greater influence on B than B would exert on A. I’d buy that proposition, wouldn’t you?
But whether or not
we’d buy it really isn’t the point. The point is that the argument didn’t explicitly
say that “if A is better at sending signals to B than B is at sending signals to A, then A will exert greater influence on B than B will exert on A.” That’s an
assumption of the argument, and without it, the argument is vulnerable.
We’re asked to prove the argument’s conclusion. The correct answer
must match our prediction. Otherwise there’s no way the argument can be justified when it says “the amygdala exerts a greater influence on the cortex than vice versa.”
A) No, this simply isn’t what we’re looking for. We have to have a bridge from “sends better signals” to “exerts more control.” This isn’t it.
B) Same explanation as A.
C) This is close, but it is only about signals and influence to the cortex, when the conclusion was about the signals and influence
to and from the cortex. Tricky wrong answer.
D) Same explanation as A and B.
E) Yep. “Directly proportional” means if you have a bit more developed neural connection, then you’d have a bit more influence. And if you have a bit less developed neural connection, then you’d have a bit less influence. If this is true, then the amygdala will exert a greater influence on the cortex than vice versa, since the neural connection is more developed from the amygdala to the cortex than the connection from the cortex to the amygdala. This answer is exactly what we were looking for, and it’s our answer.
The answer is E.