LSAT 101 – Section 2 – Question 03

LSAT 101 - Section 2 - Question 03

December 1997

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:41

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT101 S2 Q03
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
Eliminating Options +ElimOpt
A
0%
137
B
100%
167
C
0%
166
D
0%
E
0%
120
126
132
 +Easiest 150.088 +SubsectionMedium

A group of unusual meteorites was found in Shergotty, India. Their structure indicates that they originated on one of the geologically active planets, Mercury, Venus, or Mars. Because of Mercury’s proximity to the Sun, any material dislodged from that planet’s surface would have been captured by the Sun, rather than falling to Earth as meteorites. Nor could Venus be the source of the meteorites, because its gravity would have prevented dislodged material from escaping into space. The meteorites, therefore, probably fell to Earth after being dislodged from Mars, perhaps as the result of a collision with a large object.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that a group of unusual meteorites found in Shergotty, India probably came from Mars. As support, the author says that the structure of the meteorites suggests that they came from Mercury, Venus, or Mars. Any material from Mercury would have been captured by the Sun and any material from Venus would not have escaped into space, which leaves Mars as the likely source of the meteroites.

Describe Method of Reasoning
The author’s argument works by laying out three possible options (Mercury, Venus, and Mars), and eliminating two of the options (Mercury and Venus), leaving Mars as the likely source of the meteorites.

A
offering a counterexample to a theory
The author does not offer a counterexample. Instead, the author outlines a question (the origin of the unusual meteorites) and makes a conclusion about the answer to this question (that the meteorites probably came from Mars).
B
eliminating competing alternative explanations
The author’s argument works by eliminating Mercury and Venus as potential alternate explanations of the origin of the meteorites.
C
contrasting present circumstances with past circumstances
The author does not contrast present circumstances with past circumstances; there is no distinction between how things are now and how things were in the past.
D
questioning an assumption
The author does not question any assumptions. Instead, the author lists Mercury and Venus as two of the possible sources of the meteorites because of the meteorites’ structure, then explains that material from Mercury and Venus would not have reached Earth.
E
abstracting a general principle from specific data
The author does not discuss any general principles, nor does the author mention specific data.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 101 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply