Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Only if the electorate is moral and intelligent will a democracy function well. Which one of the following can be logically inferred from the claim above? (A) If the electorate is moral and intelligent, then a democracy will function well. (B) Either a democracy does not function well or else the electorate is not moral or not intelligent. (C) If the electorate is not moral or not intelligent, then a democracy will not function well. (D) If a democracy does not function well, then the electorate is not moral or not intelligent. (E) It cannot, at the same time, be true that the electorate is moral and intelligent and that a democracy will not function well.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Options C and E can be logically inferred.

Step by step solution

01

Identify the Logical Form

The statement 'Only if the electorate is moral and intelligent will a democracy function well' can be expressed logically. Here, if a democracy functions well, it implies that the electorate is both moral and intelligent.
02

Translate to If-Then Statement

The expression 'only if' translates to a conditional statement where the given consequence is necessary. Thus, 'if a democracy functions well, then the electorate is moral and intelligent' can be written as: If D (democracy functions well), then M (electorate is moral) and I (electorate is intelligent): \[ D \rightarrow (M \land I) \]
03

Find Contrapositive

The contrapositive of a conditional statement is logically equivalent to the original statement. The contrapositive of 'If D, then M and I' is If not (M and I), then not D: \[ eg (M \land I) \rightarrow eg D \] This states: If the electorate is not moral or not intelligent, then a democracy will not function well.
04

Match Logical Statements with Options

Evaluate options A through E: - **A**: 'If the electorate is moral and intelligent, then a democracy will function well.' This is not directly inferred but often considered in context - **B**: 'Either a democracy does not function well or else the electorate is not moral or not intelligent.' This matches the contrapositive - **C**: 'If the electorate is not moral or not intelligent, then a democracy will not function well.' Directly matches the contrapositive - **D**: 'If a democracy does not function well, then the electorate is not moral or not intelligent.' Is not the contrapositive nor the original - **E**: 'It's impossible for the electorate to be moral and intelligent and for democracy to not function well.' This can be deduced as it is a strong logical implication forward from the original
05

Select Valid Inferences

From our analysis: - **C**: It is directly inferred from the contrapositive - **E**: Is a forward logical inference fitting the original claim C and E are logical inferences.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Logical Inference
Logical inference is a fundamental concept used in logical reasoning, including LSAT exams. It involves deriving conclusions from given premises or statements. Inferences are drawn by analyzing the structure and content of the premises and identifying what must be true if the premises are true.

In the context of logical reasoning problems, like the one we're examining, the goal is to discern what conclusions logically follow from a statement. Consider the example statement: "Only if the electorate is moral and intelligent will a democracy function well." We start by breaking down the statement into logical parts to see what must be the case.

To identify a logical inference, we ask:
  • What conditions make the statement true?
  • What are the necessary outcomes or truths based on the initial statement?
In the exercise, options C and E represent valid logical inferences. The correct inference represents a direct consequence of the contrapositive—a widely used method in logical inference. Recognizing such logical translations and their implications is crucial for successfully answering these types of questions.
Conditional Statements
Conditional statements are expressions that establish a condition or premise, and a result or consequence. They are fundamental in logical reasoning because they help us understand the relationship between different statements or events.

A typical conditional statement takes the form "If P, then Q." It suggests that Q happens when P is true. In the exercise, the original statement, "Only if the electorate is moral and intelligent will a democracy function well," can be rephrased into a conditional statement: "If a democracy functions well, then the electorate is moral and intelligent."

This can also be expressed using standard logical notation:
  • Let D be "a democracy functions well."
  • Let M be "the electorate is moral," and I be "the electorate is intelligent."
Thus, the statement becomes: \[ D \rightarrow (M \land I) \]
Recognizing conditional relationships helps analyze the logical flow of information. Being able to convert between regular speech and conditional statements is an essential skill in logical reasoning, allowing us to evaluate and make inferences correctly.
Contrapositive
The contrapositive is an important logical tool used to derive equivalent statements. Understanding a contrapositive can clarify logical implications and help identify valid conclusions from conditional statements.

The contrapositive of a given conditional statement "If P, then Q" is "If not Q, then not P." Interestingly, a statement and its contrapositive are logically equivalent; if one is true, so is the other. In logical reasoning, forming the contrapositive can help identify conclusions that aren't immediately obvious.

In our specific example, the contrapositive of the original statement \( D \rightarrow (M \land I) \) would be: \[ eg(M \land I) \rightarrow eg D \]
This says, "If the electorate is not moral or not intelligent, then a democracy will not function well." Such a transformation reveals insights not explicitly stated but inherent in the original premise.

Identifying contrapositives can be crucial when evaluating which answers are logically justified quantitatively. In the exercise, option C directly follows this contrapositive transformation. Mastery of contrapositives and the understanding that they offer is vital for anyone aiming to excel in logical reasoning tasks.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Certain instruments used in veterinary surgery can be made either of stainless steel or of nylon. In a study of such instruments, 50 complete sterilizations of a set of nylon instruments required \(3.4\) times the amount of energy used to manufacture that set of instruments, whereas 50 complete sterilizations of a set of stainless steel instruments required \(2.1\) times the amount of energy required to manufacture that set of instruments. If the statements above are true, each of the following could be true EXCEPT: (A) The 50 complete sterilizations of the nylon instruments used more energy than did the 50 complete sterilizations of the stainless steel instruments. (B) More energy was required for each complete sterilization of the nylon instruments than was required to manufacture the nylon instruments. (C) More nylon instruments than stainless steel instruments were sterilized in the study. (D) More energy was used to produce the stainless steel instruments than was used to produce the nylon instruments. (E) The total cost of 50 complete sterilizations of the stainless steel instruments was greater than the cost of manufacturing the stainless steel instruments.

The incidence in Japan of most types of cancer is remarkably low compared to that in North America, especially considering that Japan has a modern life- style, industrial pollution included. The cancer rates, however, for Japanese people who immigrate to North America and adopt the diet of North Americans approximate the higher cancer rates prevalent in North America. If the statements above are true, they provide the most support for which one of the following? (A) The greater the level of industrial pollution in a country, the higher that country's cancer rate will tend to be. (B) The stress of life in North America is greater than that of life in Japan and predisposes to cancer. (C) The staple foods of the Japanese diet contain elements that cure cancer. (D) The relatively low rate of cancer among people in Japan does not result from a high frequency of a protective genetic trait among Japanese people. (E) The higher cancer rates of Japanese immigrants to North America are caused by fats in the North American diet.

Advertisement: Northwoods Maple Syrup, made the old-fashioned way, is simply tops for taste. And here is the proof: in a recent market survey, 7 out of every 10 shoppers who expressed a preference said that Northwoods was the only maple syrup for them, no ifs, ands, or buts. Of the following, which one is the strongest reason why the advertisement is potentially misleading? (A) The proportion of shoppers expressing no preference might have been very small. (B) Other brands of maple syrup might also be made the old-fashioned way. (C) No market survey covers more than a sizable minority of the total population of consumers. (D) The preference for the Northwoods brand might be based on such a factor as an exceptionally low price. (E) Shoppers who buy syrup might buy only maple syrup.

Tall children can generally reach high shelves easily. Short children can generally reach high shelves only with difficulty. It is known that short children are more likely than are tall children to become short adults. Therefore, if short children are taught to reach high shelves easily, the proportion of them who become short adults will decrease. A reasoning error in the argument is that the argument (A) attributes a characteristic of an individual member of a group to the group as a whole (B) presupposes that which is to be proved (C) refutes a generalization by means of an exceptional case (D) assumes a causal relationship where only a correlation has been indicated (E) takes lack of evidence for the existence of a state of affairs as evidence that there can be no such state of affairs

A poor farmer was fond of telling his children: "In this world, you are either rich or poor, and you are either honest or dishonest. All poor farmers are honest. Therefore, all rich farmers are dishonest." The farmer's conclusion is properly drawn if the argument assumes that (A) every honest farmer is poor (B) every honest person is a farmer (C) everyone who is dishonest is a rich farmer (D) everyone who is poor is honest (E) every poor person is a farmer

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on English Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free