LSAT 142 – Section 2 – Question 18

LSAT 142 - Section 2 - Question 18

December 2014

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:10

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
PT142 S2 Q18
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
90%
164
B
2%
152
C
1%
153
D
1%
151
E
7%
160
127
139
150
 +Easier 146.338 +SubsectionMedium

To find out how barn owls learn how to determine the direction from which sounds originate, scientists put distorting lenses over the eyes of young barn owls before the owls first opened their eyes. The owls with these lenses behaved as if objects making sounds were farther to the right than they actually were. Once the owls matured, the lenses were removed, yet the owls continued to act as if they misjudged the location of the source of sounds. The scientists consequently hypothesized that once a barn owl has developed an auditory scheme for estimating the point from which sounds originate, it ceases to use vision to locate sounds.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The scientists hypothesize that once barn owls learn to locate sounds through their hearing, they stop using their vision to locate sounds. They support this with a study where lenses were placed over baby barn owls' eyes. The owls misjudged sound locations and continued to do so even after they matured and the lenses were removed.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The scientists hypothesize that barn owls stop using their eyes to locate the source of sounds, because the owls in the study continued to misjudge sound locations even after the lenses were removed. But they ignore the alternative hypothesis that the lenses might have permanently damaged these owls’ eyes. In other words, what if the lenses just blinded the owls in the study, making them unable to use their vision to locate sounds even after the lenses were removed?

A
It fails to consider whether the owls’ vision was permanently impaired by their having worn the lenses while immature.
It’s possible that the owls continued to misjudge the source of sounds because their vision was permanently impaired by the lenses, and not because all owls stop using vision to locate sounds once they develop “an auditory scheme” for doing so.
B
It assumes that the sense of sight is equally good in all owls.
The argument is about barn owls, not all owls. Regardless, the scientists never assume that all barn owls have equally good vision. Instead, they draw a conclusion about all barn owls based on a study of barn owls that were given lenses from birth to maturity.
C
It attributes human reasoning processes to a nonhuman organism.
The scientists never argue that the owls use human reasoning. Instead, they hypothesize about the owls’ process of locating sounds.
D
It neglects to consider how similar distorting lenses might affect the behavior of other bird species.
The scientists’ hypothesis is only about how barn owls locate sounds. It doesn’t matter how the lenses might affect other bird species’ behavior.
E
It uses as evidence experimental results that were irrelevant to the conclusion.
The scientists do use experimental results as evidence, but those results are relevant because they’re directly related to the conclusion.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 142 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply