Questions Question 23

LSAT 104 - Section 4 - Question 23

December 16, 2012

Much of today’s literature is inferior: most of our authors are intellectually and emotionally inexperienced, and their works lack both the intricacy and the focus on the significant that characterize good literature. However, Hypatia’s latest novel is promising; it shows a maturity, complexity, and grace that far exceeds that of her earlier works.

Summary

Much of today’s literature is inferior. Most authors today are intellectually and emotionally inexperienced. Most authors’ works today lack intricacy and a focus on the significant. Good literature is characterized by intricacy and a focus on the significant. Hypatia’s most recent novel shows grace, complexity, and maturity exceeding her earlier works, and is therefore promising.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

Hypatia’s most recent work contains a property of good literature to a greater degree than her earlier works.

A

Much of today’s literature focuses less on the significant than Hypatia’s latest novel focuses on the significant.

This is unsupported because the stimulus doesn’t tell us how much Hypatia’s latest novel focuses on the significant.

B

Much of today’s literature at least lacks the property of grace.

This is unsupported; while we know that much of today’s literature lacks the properties of good literature, grace is not identified as one of those properties.

C

Hypatia’s latest novel is good literature when judged by today’s standards.

This is unsupported because a focus on the significant is identified as one of the properties of good literature, and we don’t know if Hypatia’s latest novel focuses on the significant.

D

Hypatia’s latest novel is clearly better than the majority of today’s literature.

This is unsupported because we don’t know how much Hypatia’s novel focuses on the significant. We cannot conclude that the novel’s complexity alone makes it better than most literature today.

E

Hypatia’s latest novel has at least one property of good literature to a greater degree than her earlier works.

This is strongly supported because we know that Hypatia’s novel has more complexity than her earlier works. Complexity here is taken to be synonymous with intricacy, meaning her recent work has a property of good literature.

103 comments

LSAT 21 - Section 2 - Question 23

November 26, 2012

67 comments

LSAT 23 - Section 2 - Question 23

November 24, 2012

17 comments

LSAT 67 - Section 4 - Question 23

November 14, 2012

1 comment

LSAT 137 - Section 4 - Question 23

November 14, 2012

Biologists found that off the northeast coast of a certain country the P-plankton population has recently dropped 10 percent. Additionally, fish species X, Y, and Z are beginning to show extraordinarily high death rates in the region. Since these species of fish are known to sometimes eat P-plankton, biologists believe the two phenomena are connected, but the exact nature of the connection is unknown. No other species in the ecosystem appear to be affected.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Why have the populations of P-plankton, fish X, fish Y, and fish Z, all gone down recently, even though no other species in the ecosystem has experienced a decrease in population?

Objective

The correct answer should tell us about something recent and harmful to P-plankton, fish X, fish Y, and fish Z. The correct answer should not be something that we would expect to kill members of other species.

A

Several major pharmaceutical companies in the region have been secretly dumping large amounts of waste into the ocean for many years.

The dumping has been going on for “many” years, so it wouldn’t explain a recent decrease in population. Also, we’d expect the harmful effects of dumping to damage other species, too, in addition to P-plankton, fish X, fish Y, and fish Z.

B

A new strain of bacteria is attacking P-plankton by destroying their cell walls and is attacking the respiratory systems of fish species X, Y, and Z.

This is something harmful to P-plankton, fish X, fish Y, and fish Z. Note that this bacteria is a “new” strain, which helps explain why the decreased population occurred recently.

C

A powerful toxin in the water is killing off P-plankton by inhibiting their production of a chemical they use in reproduction.

This doesn’t explain why populations of the fish have gone down recently.

D

Fish species X, Y, and Z are all experiencing widespread starvation within the affected region, and the loss of P-plankton is driving their death rates up even higher.

This tells us how loss of P-plankton affects the fish. But it doesn’t explain why the P-plankton population decreased recently.

E

Global warming has changed the climatic conditions of the ocean all along the northeast coast of the country.

We’d expect harmful effects of global warming, if any, to affect other species in addition to P-plankton, fish X, fish Y, and fish Z.

23 comments

LSAT 67 - Section 2 - Question 23

November 14, 2012

14 comments

LSAT 137 - Section 2 - Question 23

November 14, 2012

15 comments

LSAT 24 - Section 3 - Question 23

October 29, 2012

1 comment

LSAT 101 - Section 3 - Question 23

October 29, 2012

Historians of North American architecture who have studied early nineteenth-century houses with wooden floors have observed that the boards used on the floors of bigger houses were generally much narrower than those used on the floors of smaller houses. These historians have argued that, since the people for whom the bigger houses were built were generally richer than the people for whom the smaller houses were built, floors made out of narrow floorboards were probably once a status symbol, designed to proclaim the owner’s wealth.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The author hypothesizes that in the early 19th century, floors made out of narrow floorboards were likely a status symbol designed to convey a homeowner’s wealth. This is based on the fact that bigger houses tended to use narrower floorboards than smaller houses, and that bigger houses tended to be built for people who were richer than those for whom smaller houses were built.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes that there’s no more likely explanation for the use of narrower floorboards in the bigger houses besides the idea that the floorboards were status symbols. This overlooks the possibility that there may have been other reasonable explanations, such as stylistic trends associated with bigger houses, or perhaps narrower floor boards were more functional for bigger houses or were cheaper to use in bigger houses.

A

More original floorboards have survived from big early nineteenth-century houses than from small early nineteenth-century houses.

The comparative number of surviving floorboards has no clear impact. We have no reason to think that having more floor boards survive helps show that the narrower floorboards were used as a status symbol.

B

In the early nineteenth century, a piece of narrow floorboard was not significantly less expensive than a piece of wide floorboard of the same length.

This eliminates an alternate explanation that narrower boards were used because they were much cheaper. In theory, homeowners might have been trying to save by using boards that were much cheaper. (B) says that’s not true, which makes the status symbol hypothesis more plausible.

C

In the early nineteenth century, smaller houses generally had fewer rooms than did bigger houses.

The number of rooms doesn’t have a clear impact on the purpose of the narrower floorboards. (C) helps show that narrower floorboards, which were used in bigger houses, tended to be used for a greater number of rooms. That doesn’t signify anything about the boards’ purpose.

D

Some early nineteenth-century houses had wide floorboards near the walls of each room and narrower floorboards in the center, where the floors were usually carpeted.

If anything, (D) might weaken by suggesting owners wanted to hide the use of narrower floorboards, but wanted to show off wider boards. This goes against the theory that owners used narrower boards as status symbols.

E

Many of the biggest early nineteenth-century houses but very few small houses from that period had some floors that were made of materials that were considerably more expensive than wood, such as marble.

So, some owners of bigger houses used materials that were more expensive than wood. But that doesn’t suggest anything about the purpose of narrower wooden floorboards. Perhaps other materials were used a status symbol; narrower boards may or may not also be a status symbol.

146 comments

LSAT 29 - Section 4 - Question 23

October 12, 2012

62 comments