A
It is unlikely that brain-scanning technology will ever enable researchers to understand how the brain enables us to think.
B
There is no way that researchers can know for certain that subjects whose brains are being scanned are accurately reporting what they are thinking.
C
Because subjects whose brains are being scanned may not accurately report what they are thinking, the results of brain-scanning research should be regarded with great skepticism.
D
Brain scans can provide information about the accuracy of the verbal reports of subjects whose brains are being scanned.
E
Information from brain scans can help researchers understand how the brain enables us to think only if the verbal reports of those whose brains are being scanned are accurate.
A
assumes, without providing justification, that the feeding behavior of the birds observed was not affected by the ornithologist’s act of observation
B
fails to specify the nature of the animal food sources, other than insects, that were consumed by the birds
C
adopts a widespread belief about the birds’ feeding habits without considering the evidence that led to the belief
D
neglects the possibility that the birds have different patterns of food consumption during different parts of the day and night
E
fails to consider the possibility that the birds’ diet has changed since the earlier belief about their diet was formed
The question stem reads: The reasoning in the ornithologist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument… This is a Flaw question.
The ornithologist begins by stating how a particular bird species (we will call this bird "X") diet is believed to consist primarily of vegetation (plants). However, the ornithologist concludes that belief is wrong. In other words, The ornithologist argues that "X" birds' diets are mostly not plants. As evidence, he describes how he camouflaged himself and watched hundreds of "X" birds every morning for a month. During his morning observations, he estimates that over half of what "X" birds ate were insects and animal food resources (not plants). This line of reasoning is flawed because the ornithologist only observed birds during the morning. Let's say I hypothesized that the belief humans frequently drink coffee is wrong. To prove my theory, I hid in people's closets for many months and watched their bedtime routines. During my observations, I noticed very few people drank coffee. Hypothesis proven, right? No! The problem is that I only observed people at night when they were unlikely to drink coffee. The other problem is that I shouldn't hide in people's closets. An ideal experiment has a representative sample.
Similarly, the ornithologist has only observed what "X" birds eat in the morning. However, what "X" birds eat in the morning might be unrepresentative of their diet on the whole. Now that we have identified our flaw let's move to the answer choices.
Answer Choice (A) is wrong. The ornithologist says he camouflaged himself. You might argue that perhaps his camouflage was ineffective. However, our job LSAT flaw questions in the reasoning, not to question the truth of the premises. Even if he did camouflage himself well, his argument is still problematic (he was only watching "X" birds in the morning!).
Answer Choice (B) is wrong. The ornithologist does not need to describe exactly what kinds of food "X" birds ate. He needs to say that plants accounted for 50% or less of their diet. So if it was true that most of "X" birds' diets were insect and animal food sources, that would imply 50% or less of "X" birds' diet was plants.
Answer Choice (C) is wrong. The author does not adopt the widespread belief. The author rejects the widespread idea that "X" birds' diet is mostly plants.
Correct Answer Choice (D) is what we discussed. If it was confirmed that "X" birds have different feeding patterns throughout the day, the ornithologist made an error by taking an unrepresentative sample of the birds' diet.
Answer Choice (E) is incorrect. Mapping on the stimulus to (E), we would get: fails to consider the possibility that "X" birds diet has changed since the earlier belief that "X" birds mostly ate plants was formed. Even if it was true that the popular belief was formed when "X" birds used to mostly eat plants, what matters is what the birds eat now. If "X" birds mostly eat insects and animals, then the popular belief is wrong. Being right in the past doesn't make you any less wrong in the present.
A
supporting a general principle by means of an example
B
drawing a conclusion about a particular case on the basis of a general principle
C
supporting its conclusion by means of an analogy
D
claiming that whatever holds for each member of a group must hold for the whole group
E
inferring one general principle from another, more general, principle
The question stem reads: The reasoning in which of the following is most similar to that in the naturalist's argument? This is a Parallel question.
The naturalist begins by claiming that a species can survive the change in an environment as long as the change is not too rapid. The naturalist has provided a general rule saying that the change can be ok for a species, with the caveat that the change does not occur too rapidly. The naturalist concludes that the threats humans create to woodland species arise not from cutting down trees but from the rate at which we are cutting down trees. The naturalist has applied the universal rule about species to the specific example of woodland species. So the problem is not that change we are creating by cutting down trees, but the because we are causing the change too rapidly.
When evaluating an answer choice, we need a universal rule with a caveat. The correct AC will apply that universal rule to a specific example and say that the specific example is failing to satisfy the caveat.
Answer Choice (A) is incorrect. (A) does not provide a universal rule; it only gives a specific rule about fossil fuels. Additionally, (A) 's rule about fossil fuels lacks the caveat we are looking for.
Answer Choice (B) is incorrect. We can quickly eliminate (B) because of the word "many." Remember, we need a universal rule, so if (B) was right, it would begin with "all people." Additionally, (B) 's rule lacks the caveat we are looking for, nor does (B) apply its rule to a specific example.
Answer Choice (C) is incorrect. Similar to (B), we can eliminate (C) because it says "some" when we are looking for a universal rule. Additionally, (C) also lacks the caveat, nor does (C) apply the rule to a specific example.
Correct Answer Choice (D) matches the stimulus. (D) provides a general rule that "people do not fear change," under the caveat people know what the change will bring. (D) then applies that rule to the specific example of the author's company's employees. The company's employees' fears arise from the fact the company is changing, but because they do not know what the change will bring (the caveat is not satisfied).
Answer Choice (E) is incorrect. (E) does not provide a general rule, so we can eliminate it.
A
Recent cutbacks in government spending have forced public libraries to purchase fewer popular contemporary novels.
B
Due to the installation of sophisticated new antitheft equipment, the recent increase in shoplifting that has hit most retail businesses has left bookstores largely unaffected.
C
Over the past few years many bookstores have capitalized on the lucrative coffee industry by installing coffee bars.
D
Bookstore owners reported a general shift away from the sale of inexpensive paperback novels and toward the sale of lucrative hardback books.
E
Citing a lack of free time, many survey respondents indicated that they had canceled magazine subscriptions in favor of purchasing individual issues at bookstores when time permits.
A
The waste should never have been stored in its current location.
B
The waste should be placed in the most secure location that can ever be found.
C
Moving the waste to the proposed site would reduce the threat posed by the waste.
D
Whenever waste must be moved, one should limit the amount of time allotted to locating alternative waste storage sites.
E
Any site to which the waste could be moved will be safer than its present site.
A
People with abnormally low concentrations of the photopigments for perceiving red can perceive fewer shades of red than people with normal concentrations.
B
Questions that ask subjects to distinguish between different shades of the same color are difficult to phrase with complete clarity.
C
Some people are uninterested in fine gradations of color and fail to notice or report differences they do not care about.
D
Some people are unable to distinguish red from green due to an absence in the retina of the photopigment sensitive to green.
E
Some people fail to report distinctions between certain shades of red because they lack the names for those shades.
It’s important to note that the author is not assuming that night-lights actually cause nearsightedness. The author’s conclusion is just that if night-lights cause nearsightedness, then the effect disappears with age.