LSAT 128 – Section 3 – Question 18

LSAT 128 - Section 3 - Question 18

December 2008

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:50

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
PT128 S3 Q18
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Analogy +An
A
66%
168
B
8%
163
C
13%
165
D
5%
160
E
9%
160
149
160
170
 +Hardest 145.461 +SubsectionMedium

Live Commentary

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

Education critics’ contention that the use of calculators in mathematics classes will undermine students’ knowledge of the rationale underlying calculational procedures is clearly false. Every new information-handling technology has produced virtually the same accusation. Some Greek philosophers, for example, believed that the advent of written language would erode people’s capacity to remember information and speak extemporaneously.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that the use of calculators in math classes will not undermine students’ knowledge of the rationale underlying calculational procedures. This is based on the assertion that every new information technology has received the same kind of criticism. One example is certain criticism of written language. Some Greek philosophers thought written language would destroy people’s memory and ability to speak extemporaneously.

Identify and Describe Flaw
What do the complaints about other technologies have to do with whether calculators in math classes will undermine students knowledge of the rationale underlying calculations? Nothing. The author assumes that because similar complaints have been raised about other technologies, this somehow shows one particular complaint about calculators is wrong.

A
presents only evidence whose relevancy to the issue raised by the opponents has not been established
The author fails to show that complaints about other technologies is relevant to the impact of calculators in math classes.
B
draws a conclusion based on an ambiguous notion of knowledge
There’s nothing ambiguous about the concept “knowledge” in this argument. It takes on its ordinary dictionary definition.
C
takes for granted that the advantages offered by new information-handling technologies always outweigh the disadvantages
The author never expresses an opinion on whether using calculators in the classroom is good or bad; the conclusion is simply that calculators won’t have a particular effect. So the author doesn’t engage in weighing advantages/disadvantages of calculators or any other technology.
D
takes a condition that suffices to prove its conclusion to be a condition necessary for the truth of that conclusion
There’s no confusing of any sufficient or necessary conditions. The argument is not based on conditional logic and doesn’t assert that anything is sufficient or necessary.
E
concludes that a hypothesis is false simply because it contradicts other beliefs held by the advocates of that hypothesis
The author doesn’t bring up the education critics’ other beliefs. The author does cite to complaints about other technologies; but the author doesn’t say that the education critics are wrong because of the education critics’ own other beliefs.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 128 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply