Answer choices that merely provide that an essential element has been satisfied should be viewed with lots of skepticism.
For example:
“Liable for battery because x made contact with y and that contact would be offensive to a reasonable person” looks good. It’s got that battery vibe to it.
But elements are necessary conditions, not sufficient conditions (warning: LSAT memories). Stating that an element or any number of elements less than all required elements have been satisfied really says very little of help. It’s certainly not dispositive and these answer choices imply that it is.
If there were 1000 necessary components to creating a computer chip, telling me that 999 of those components are included would not allow me to know that the chip will function. Only 1000 is sufficient for anything definite.
On the other hand, answer choices that eliminate even one element are great. If I know that one of those elements in the computer chip is missing, I can draw a valid conclusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment