LSAT 37 - Section 2 - Question 19

March 11, 2014

73 comments

LSAT 37 - Section 2 - Question 21

March 11, 2014

13 comments

LSAT 37 - Section 2 - Question 25

March 11, 2014

30 comments

LSAT 113 - Section 2 - Question 16

March 11, 2014

Media consultant: Electronic media are bound to bring an end to the institution of the traditional school in our culture. This is because the emergence of the traditional school, characterized by a group of students gathered with a teacher in a classroom, was facilitated by the availability of relatively inexpensive printed books. Currently, however, the function of books in communicating information is gradually being taken over by electronic media. So, it is inevitable that the traditional school will not survive in our culture.

Summarize Argument

The media consultant concludes that electronic media will bring an end to traditional schools. He supports this by saying that the availability and affordability of printed books helped to bring about traditional schools, and that electronic media is now fulfilling the purpose of books in communicating information.

Identify and Describe Flaw

The media consultant assumes that, because having books helped to start traditional schools, not having books (because they’re being replaced by electronic media) will end traditional schools. The problem is that he never actually showed that books are necessary to traditional schools. Just because books helped these schools emerge doesn’t mean that they’re necessary for the schools to continue to exist in the future.

A
presupposes as a premise what it is trying to establish

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of “circular reasoning,” where the premise is simply a restatement of the conclusion. The media consultant doesn’t make this mistake. His premises are distinct from his conclusion, even though they don’t support it well.

B
relies inappropriately on expert testimony

The media consultant doesn’t mention any experts at all, so he can’t inappropriately rely on their testimony.

C
presupposes that just because something can happen it will happen

The media consultant concludes that traditional schools will be eliminated, but he doesn’t do so on the basis that they can be eliminated. In fact, he never actually proves that they can be eliminated. So, (C) can’t describe the flaw in his argument.

D
mistakes something that enables an institution to arise for something necessary to the institution

The media consultant assumes that just because books enabled traditional schools to arise, they must be necessary to traditional schools. But maybe these schools can carry on just fine, even though electronic media are fulfilling the role of books in communicating information.

E
confuses the value of an institution with the medium by which it operates

The media consultant never makes any claims about the value of traditional schools.


50 comments

LSAT 113 - Section 2 - Question 18

March 11, 2014

Some critics of space exploration programs claim that they are too costly to be justified. Moreover, there is the very real risk of a debilitating explosion—most experts say something like a 1-in-70 chance per flight. Budgetary pressures to make the programs cheaper only serve to undermine safety: one program’s managers uncovered a series of manufacturing flaws that critics contend are a direct consequence of the pressure to produce results as quickly and cheaply as possible.

Summary
Some people say space exploration programs are too costly to be justified. Most experts say there is a real risk of explosion every flight. Efforts to make the programs cheaper undercut safety. For example, one program had several manufacturing flaws, and critics say these were a result of pressures to cut costs.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
Reducing cost for each space flight may lead to another problem of making each flight more dangerous.

A
Attempts to solve one problem can lead to the exacerbation of another problem.
This is strongly supported because the stimulus presents evidence that making a space flight as quickly and cheaply as possible (solving one problem) led to manufacturing flaws (exacerbating another problem).
B
Safety risks are sometimes ignored in the name of scientific progress.
This is unsupported because safety risks are happening due to a desire to cut costs, not a desire to enhance scientific progress.
C
Safety is often sacrificed in order to reach a goal as quickly as possible.
This is unsupported because we don’t know how often these safety sacrifices happen overall. We only know that it can happen.
D
Bureaucratic mistakes can lead to quality reduction and inefficiency.
This is unsupported because we don’t know that any of the reductions in safety happened due to bureaucratic mistakes. They may have happened without mistake simply due to pressures to cut costs.
E
Space exploration is too dangerous to be continued.
This is unsupported because we don’t know at what level of danger space exploration should no longer occur. This is not a value statement that was explored in the stimulus.

36 comments

LSAT 113 - Section 2 - Question 19

March 11, 2014

77 comments

LSAT 113 - Section 2 - Question 21

March 11, 2014

14 comments

LSAT 113 - Section 2 - Question 25

March 11, 2014

In a car accident, air bags greatly reduce the risk of serious injury. However, statistics show that cars without air bags are less likely to be involved in accidents than are cars with air bags. Thus, cars with air bags are no safer than cars without air bags.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that cars with air bags are no safer than those without, since cars without air bags are less likely to be in accidents.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that cars with air bags are no safer than cars without air bags, simply because they’re more likely to be involved in accidents. However, she overlooks two important points:

(1) How much more likely are cars with air bags to be in accidents?

(2) How serious are the accidents for each type of car? If cars without air bags have fewer accidents but those accidents are more dangerous or fatal, the author can’t assume that cars without air bags are just as safe. Essentially, she treats the likelihood of getting into an accident as equally important as the severity of the accident.

A
assumes, without providing justification, that any car with air bags will probably become involved in an accident
The author doesn’t make this assumption. She claims that cars with air bags are more likely to be involved in accidents, but she never claims that all of them will be involved in accidents.
B
denies the possibility that cars without air bags have other safety features that reduce the risk of serious injury at least as much as do air bags
The author neither addresses nor denies this possibility. Also, she claims that cars without air bags are no less safe than cars with them. So, if anything, she might accept the possibility that they have some other effective safety features.
C
overlooks the possibility that some accidents involve both cars with air bags and cars without air bags
The author admits that both kinds of cars can be involved in accidents; she just says that cars without air bags are less likely to be in them. She never overlooks the possibility that some accidents involve both kinds of cars.
D
assumes, without providing justification, that the likelihood of an accident’s occurring should weigh at least as heavily as the seriousness of any resulting injury in estimates of relative safety
The author assumes that, when estimating the relative safety of a car, the likelihood of getting into an accident is at least as important as the seriousness of any injuries from an accident. But what if cars without air bags have fewer but more fatal accidents?
E
takes for granted that all accidents would cause air bags to be deployed
The author simply doesn’t make this assumption. She claims that cars with air bags are more likely to be in accidents, but she never assumes that all of those accidents would cause the air bags to be deployed.

31 comments

LSAT 37 - Section 2 - Question 08

March 11, 2014

15 comments

LSAT 37 - Section 2 - Question 09

March 11, 2014

8 comments

«‹137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157›»