LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 10

April 21, 2012

Helen: Reading a book is the intellectual equivalent of investing money: you’re investing time, thereby foregoing other ways of spending that time, in the hope that what you learn will later afford you more opportunities than you’d get by spending the time doing something other than reading that book.

Randi: But that applies only to vocational books. Reading fiction is like watching a sitcom: it’s just wasted time.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Randi concludes that reading books is only an intellectual investment if those books are vocational. This qualifies Helen’s general claim that reading a book in hopes that it will lead to gains later on makes reading similar to investing money. To support this qualification, Randi says that reading fiction is a waste of time, comparable to watching sitcoms.

Describe Method of Reasoning
Randi argues that Helen’s analogy cannot be accurately drawn between two kinds of action, because not all the instances of one action are analogous to the other action. By claiming that reading fiction is analogous to watching a sitcom instead of to financial investment, Randi undermines the strength of Helen’s general analogy between book-reading and investment.

A
questioning how the evidence Helen uses for a claim was gathered
Randi does not question Helen’s evidence-gathering, only her theoretical reasoning. In fact, neither Helen nor Randi really presents gathered evidence at all.
B
disputing the scope of Helen’s analogy by presenting another analogy
By presenting an analogy between reading fiction and watching sitcoms, Randi claims that only reading certain (vocational) books can be compared to investing. This is how Randi disputes the scope of Helen’s analogy between reading and investing.
C
arguing that Helen’s reasoning ultimately leads to an absurd conclusion
Randi does not argue that Helen’s reasoning leads to an absurd conclusion, only that Helen’s reasoning is flawed because Helen’s analogy is too broad.
D
drawing an analogy to an example presented by Helen
Randi does not draw an analogy to an example presented by Helen. Randi only analogizes to a new example: watching sitcoms.
E
denying the relevance of an example presented by Helen
Randi does not deny the relevance of any part of Helen’s argument, just claims that its scope is too general.

7 comments

LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 07

April 21, 2012

Environmentalist: The excessive atmospheric buildup of carbon dioxide, which threatens the welfare of everyone in the world, can be stopped only by reducing the burning of fossil fuels. Any country imposing the strict emission standards on the industrial burning of such fuels that this reduction requires, however, would thereby reduce its gross national product. No nation will be willing to bear singlehandedly the costs of an action that will benefit everyone. It is obvious, then, that the catastrophic consequences of excessive atmospheric carbon dioxide are unavoidable unless _______.

Summary

According to the environmentalist, excessive atmospheric carbon dioxide threatens everyone’s welfare, and can only be stopped by reducing fossil fuel use. However, any country that participated in this reduction would also reduce its GNP. Also, no country would willingly take on the entire cost of an action that helps everyone. Thus, the threat of excess atmospheric carbon can only be avoided if... what?

In Lawgic:

P1: stop carbon excess → reduce fossil fuels

P2: reduce fossil fuels → reduce GNP

P3: country → /willing to bear entire cost

C: stop carbon excess → ?

Strongly Supported Conclusions

From the stimulus, we can conclude that avoiding the threat of excess atmospheric carbon dioxide can only be avoided if multiple countries work together to share the burden of reducing fossil fuel use.

A
all nations become less concerned with pollution than with the economic burdens of preventing it

This is anti-supported. The whole problem for the environmentalist is that each individual country is too concerned with economics, and not concerned enough with pollution. Shifting the balance further towards economics definitely wouldn’t avoid the carbon crisis.

B
multinational corporations agree to voluntary strict emission standards

This is not supported. The environmentalist doesn’t indicate the role of multinational corporations at all, and talks about strict government regulation rather than voluntary emission standards.

C
international agreements produce industrial emission standards

This is strongly supported. The environmentalist’s argument is that countries aren’t willing to work alone to impose industrial emission standards. International agreements would share the economic burden, thus allowing a solution through participation.

D
distrust among nations is eliminated

This is not supported. The environmentalist doesn’t suggest anything about distrust among nations. It may be tempting to assume that distrust is the obstacle, but we just don’t have enough information about nations’ intentions and their leaders’ beliefs.

E
a world government is established

This is not supported. The environmentalist is leading to the conclusion that some kind of international participation is necessary, but world government is an extreme way to do so, and it’s not an option suggested in the stimulus. This just goes too far.


24 comments

LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 06

April 21, 2012

12 comments

LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 05

April 21, 2012

Byrne: One of our club’s bylaws specifies that any officer who fails to appear on time for any one of the quarterly board meetings, or who misses two of our monthly general meetings, must be suspended. Thibodeaux, an officer, was recently suspended. But Thibodeaux has never missed a monthly general meeting. Therefore, Thibodeaux must have failed to appear on time for a quarterly board meeting.

A
fails to consider the possibility that Thibodeaux has arrived late for two or more monthly general meetings
We know that Thibodeaux didn’t miss any monthly meetings. Lateness to a monthly meeting is irrelevant, since we’re not told that this leads to a suspension. (Lateness to quarterly is sufficient for suspension, but we don’t know about lateness to monthly.)
B
presumes, without providing justification, that if certain events each produce a particular result, then no other event is sufficient to produce that result
The author assumes that nothing besides lateness to quarterly or missing 2 monthly could be sufficient for suspension. This overlooks the possibility that other things could also be sufficient for suspension. That’s why Thib. doesn’t have to have been late to a quarterly meeting.
C
takes for granted that an assumption required to establish the argument’s conclusion is sufficient to establish that conclusion
The assumption required to establish the conclusion is the idea that there’s no other way to be suspended besides the two conditions mentioned. That assumption actually would be sufficient to establish the conclusion, so (C) doesn’t describe a flaw in this argument.
D
fails to specify at what point someone arriving at a club meeting is officially deemed late
The exact timing involved in being “late” is irrelevant. We can still label someone as “late” without knowing exactly how late they were.
E
does not specify how long Thibodeaux has been an officer
The length of time Thibodeaux has been an officer is irrelevant. None of the conditions in the rule concerning suspension relate to years of experience as an officer.

20 comments

LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 04

April 21, 2012

People who consume a lot of honey tend to have fewer cavities than others have. Yet, honey is high in sugar, and sugar is one of the leading causes of tooth decay.

"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why do people who consume a lot of honey tend to have fewer cavities than others even though honey is high in sugar, which is one of the leading causes of tooth decay?

Objective
The correct answer will help explain why people who eat a lot of honey tend to have fewer cavities than others even though honey is high in sugar. The correct answer will discuss outside factors that are typically true for people who eat a lot of honey that lead to them having fewer cavities or reasons that eating honey actually leads to fewer cavities even though it’s high in sugar.

A
People who eat a lot of honey tend to consume very little sugar from other sources.
It doesn’t matter how much sugar people who eat a lot of honey tend to consume from other sources. We know they consume a lot of sugar because of the amount of honey they eat.
B
Many people who consume a lot of honey consume much of it dissolved in drinks.
The way people who consume a lot of honey choose to consume that honey is irrelevant. Regardless of their consumption method, they’re ingesting a lot of sugar, so we want to know why they tend to have fewer cavities than others.
C
People’s dental hygiene habits vary greatly.
This is a nonfactor. We know nothing about the typical dental hygiene habits of people who eat a lot of honey or those who don’t, so (C) is irrelevant.
D
Refined sugars have been linked to more health problems than have unrefined sugars.
We’re not concerned with miscellaneous health problems. We want to know why those who consume large amounts of honey tend to have fewer cavities than others even though honey contains high levels of sugar.
E
Honey contains bacteria that inhibit the growth of the bacteria that cause tooth decay.
(E) provides a reason that eating honey can prevent cavities even though honey is high in sugar. The bacteria in honey that inhibit the growth of tooth-decaying bacteria could do more to prevent cavities than the sugar in honey contributes to cavities.

3 comments

LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 03

April 21, 2012

Statistics from the National Booksellers Association indicate that during the last five years most bookstores have started to experience declining revenues from the sale of fiction, despite national campaigns to encourage people to read more fiction. Therefore, these reading campaigns have been largely unsuccessful.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that national reading campaigns encouraging people to read more fiction have been largely unsuccessful. This is because bookstore revenue from fiction sales has decreased over the last five years.

Notable Assumptions
Based solely on a correlation between the reading campaigns and bookstore fiction sales, the author concludes that the reading campaigns have failed to achieve their purpose. He therefore assumes that the reading campaigns haven’t mitigated what would’ve otherwise been an even steeper decline in fiction sales. The author also assumes that bookstore sales signal a decline in fiction sales. Thus, he believes that bookstore fiction sales haven’t been siphoned off by some other method (e.g. online) sales.

A
Mail order book clubs have enjoyed substantial growth in fiction sales throughout the last five years.
While bookstore fiction sales have decreased, mail order fiction sales have substantially increased. Thus, the national reading campaign may well have encouraged people to read more fiction. At the very least, the author can’t draw the conclusion that the campaign has failed.
B
During the last five years the most profitable items in bookstores have been newspapers and periodicals rather than novels.
Revenue from fiction sales at bookstores has decreased, regardless of how newspaper sales have changed. This doesn’t offset that fact in any way that would weaken the author’s argument.
C
Fierce competition has forced booksellers to make drastic markdowns on the cover price of best-selling biographies.
Biographies aren’t fiction. We don’t care.
D
Due to the poor economic conditions that have prevailed during the last five years, most libraries report substantial increases in the number of patrons seeking books on changing careers and starting new businesses.
These sorts of books aren’t fiction. We’re not interested.
E
The National Booksellers Association statistics do not include profits from selling novels by mail to overseas customers.
We care about the effects of the national reading campaign. Overseas customers don’t matter.

11 comments

LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 02

April 21, 2012

6 comments

LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 01

April 21, 2012

Executive: Our company is proud of its long history of good relations with its employees. In fact, a recent survey of our retirees proves that we treat our employees fairly, since 95 percent of the respondents reported that they had always been treated fairly during the course of their careers with us.

A
presents as its sole premise a claim that one would accept as true only if one already accepted the truth of the conclusion
(A) describes circular reasoning. But the argument does not rely on a premise that restates its conclusion. The premise involves survey results. The conclusion is that “we treat our employees fairly.”
B
relies on evidence that cannot be verified
The evidence consists of survey results. There’s no reason to think that the results of the survey cannot be verified. Just count up the responses. In any case, there’s nothing flawed with relying on evidence that can’t be verified.
C
equivocates on the word “fairly”
There’s no reason to think “fairly” is used in two different ways. Each use of “fairly” has the same definition: treated in a way that is right or just.
D
bases a generalization on a sample that may not be representative
The argument’s conclusion is a generalization concerning how “employees” are treated. But the evidence is based on a sample of retirees — their opinion might not be representative of employees’ opinion.
E
presumes, without providing justification, that older methods of managing employees are superior to newer ones
The author never compares older methods to news ones. The author might believe that the same managing methods are used, and that those methods treat employees both new and past fairly.

10 comments

LSAT 125 - Section 1 - Passage 4 - Questions

April 21, 2012

87 comments

LSAT 125 - Section 1 - Passage 4 - Passage

April 21, 2012

11 comments

«‹1234567›»