Jessica Booker
Legendary Member
TCLA Moderator
Gold Member
Graduate Recruitment
Premium Member
Forum Team
- Aug 1, 2019
- 14,292
- 19,932
I agree with you - I think this is a mistake.Bit confused about one Watson Glaser question and wondering if someone could help. The question was an interpretation question on the lawyer portal, stating:
"Everyone who suffers with depression also experiences some type of personal battle. For example, Chloe’s dog passed away while Jamie lost his job."
"Jamie lost his job because of his depression." Correct answer is 'conclusion follows'. The logic given in the explanation "conclusion follows because it states that depression leads to personal problems, which for Jamie was losing his job.
But surely, it is not possible to believe beyond reasonable doubt that the depression is because of the lost job, when it could also be true that the lost job caused the depression. In fact, if we were to strictly follow according the answer's logic of depression causing these personal problems, then surely the death of Chloe's dog was because Chloe was depressed? Which makes no sense at all...
I am rubbish at these assessments, but even I think this is clearly wrong. It does not state that depression leads to personal problems, to me it just says in conjuction with the depression there is a personal battle. And as you have highlighed, the depression would not have necessarily caused Chloe's dog to die.