Sections 2

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 25

November 17, 2013

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 26

November 17, 2013

People may praise the talent of a painter capable of realistically portraying a scene and dismiss as artistically worthless the efforts of abstract expressionists, but obviously an exact replica of the scene depicted is not the only thing people appreciate in a painting, for otherwise photography would have entirely displaced painting as an art form.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

The author concludes that exact replication is not the only quality viewers value in a painting. He supports this by contending that, if this wasn’t the case, photography would have replaced painting as an art form by now.

Describe Method of Reasoning

The author is supporting a conclusion about people’s preferences in visual art by citing a relevant fact. Note that this is an “is” conclusion, not an “ought” conclusion: the author is talking about what people do like, not what they should like.

A

using a claim about what most people appreciate to support an aesthetic principle

The author’s claim about what people appreciate (i.e. paintings that aren’t exact replicas) is his conclusion; it doesn’t support anything else. Also, it’s not clear that his claims are necessarily about “most” people.

B

appealing to an aesthetic principle to defend the tastes that people have

The author doesn’t defend people’s tastes: he simply describes them.

C

explaining a historical fact in terms of the artistic preferences of people

This gets it backwards: the historical fact (that photography didn’t displace painting) is used to make a conclusion about people’s artistic preferences (more than just replication).

D

appealing to a historical fact to support a claim about people’s artistic preferences

The author cites a historical fact (that photography didn’t displace painting) to justify his claim that people desire more than pure replication in paintings.

E

considering historical context to defend the artistic preferences of people

The author doesn’t defend people’s tastes: he simply describes them. The historical context is used to show what the preferences are, not to defend them.

31 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 17

November 17, 2013

40 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 18

November 17, 2013

Psychologists have found that the implementation of policies allowing work schedules to be tailored to individuals’ needs does not typically increase managers’ job satisfaction or their efficiency—although this may be because most managers already have the autonomy to adjust their own schedules. But these flexible-schedule policies do increase job satisfaction, productivity, and attendance among nonmanagerial employees. The benefits dissipate somewhat over time, however, and they are reduced even further if schedules are too elastic.

Summary

Psychologists have discovered that allowing flexible work schedules does not cause managers’ job satisfaction or efficiency to increase. These flexible schedules do cause job satisfaction, productivity, and attendance to increase among nonmanagerial employees. However, these benefits decrease over time and are reduced even further if schedules are too flexible.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

The benefits of flexible work schedule policies are better observed among nonmanagerial employees than among managers.

A

Implementing flexible schedules would be an effective means of increasing the job satisfaction and efficiency of managers who do not already have scheduling autonomy.

We don’t know if flexible schedules would in fact increase satisfaction and efficiency among managers. We can’t assume that the explanation given for why managers don’t reflect these benefits is true, it is only suggested as one possible explanation.

B

Flexible-schedule policies should be expected to improve the morale of some individual employees but not the overall morale of a company’s workforce.

We don’t know if flexible schedule policies would not improve the overall morale of a company. We could reasonable assume that overall morale would improve if the morale of the nonmanagerial workforce improves.

C

Flexible schedules should be expected to substantially improve a company’s productivity and employee satisfaction in the long run.

We don’t know if flexible schedule policies improve satisfaction in the long run. We are told that the benefits of these policies decrease over time.

D

There is little correlation between managers’ job satisfaction and their ability to set their own work schedules.

We don’t know if there is in fact little correlation between these two ideas. The explanation offered for why managers don’t experience increased job satisfaction or efficiency is only one possible explanation.

E

The typical benefits of flexible-schedule policies cannot be reliably inferred from observations of the effects of such policies on managers.

The effects of flexible schedule policies cannot be observed among managers because these managers did not experience an increase in job satisfaction or efficiency. On the other hand, nonmanagerial employees did see increases in these areas.

38 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 19

November 17, 2013

Viewers surveyed immediately after the televised political debate last year between Lopez and Tanner tended to think that Lopez had made the better arguments, but the survey respondents who reported that Lopez’s arguments were better may have been biased in favor of Lopez. After all, Lopez eventually did win the election.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The author hypothesizes that the viewers responded that Lopez gave better arguments during a televised political debate may have been biased in favor of Lopez. This is based on the fact that Lopez eventually won the election.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes that the fact Lopez eventually won the election suggests that the people thought Lopez’s arguments were better in the debate were biased. This overlooks the possibility that Lopez’s arguments were in fact better and convinced people to vote for him.

A

Most people who voted in the election that Lopez won did not watch the debate.

The author never assumed that most people who voted in the election watched the debate. There could have been a tiny number of people who watched the debate; the author simply thinks those people may have been biased toward Lopez.

B

Most people in the live audience watching the debate who were surveyed immediately afterward said that they thought that Tanner was more persuasive in the debate than was Lopez.

It’s not clear what live viewer reactions have to do with a survey of people who saw the debate on television. In any case, (B) is consistent with the author’s theory, since the survey respondents’ opinion about who won the debate still can be due to bias.

C

The people who watched the televised debate were more likely to vote for Tanner than were the people who did not watch the debate.

This compares the likelihood of voting for Tanner among viewers and nonviewers. But what matters is whether the viewers were more likely to vote for Tanner or Lopez. (C) could just mean 1% of viewers were likely to vote for Tanner (as long as that is greater than for nonviewers).

D

Most of the viewers surveyed immediately prior to the debate said that they would probably vote for Tanner.

This is strong evidence most viewers were not biased in favor of Lopez before the debate, which suggests bias was not the reason viewers of the debate said Lopez had better arguments.

E

Lopez won the election over Tanner by a very narrow margin.

The narrow nature of the victory doesn’t change the fact Lopez won. The author never suggested that the victory was dominant or that the specific magnitude of the win affects the likelihood that viewers of the debate were biased.

65 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 20

November 17, 2013

21 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 21

November 17, 2013

Editor: Most of the books of fiction we have published were submitted by literary agents for writers they represented; the rest were received directly from fiction writers from whom we requested submissions. No nonfiction manuscript has been given serious attention, let alone been published, unless it was from a renowned figure or we had requested the manuscript after careful review of the writer’s book proposal.

Summary

If a fiction book was published → submitted by a literary agent OR received directly by request.

If a nonfiction book has been given serious attention (or published) → from a renowned figure OR requested after review of book proposal.

Very Strongly Supported Conclusions

There’s no obvious conclusion to draw from the stimulus. Just keep in mind that we have one rule for what must be true if a fiction book was published, and we have another rule for what must be true if a nonfiction book was given serious attention or published.

A

Most unrequested manuscripts that the publishing house receives are not given serious attention.

Not supported, because most unrequested manuscripts might be from a renowned figure. Or, they might also be fiction manuscripts submitted by literary agents. This is why most unrequested manuscripts still might be given serious attention.

B

Most of the books that the publishing house publishes that are not by renowned authors are books of fiction.

We don’t know the proportion of books that are fiction among non-renowned authors. It’s possible that every book by a non-renowned author is a nonfiction one (that was published after review of the book proposal).

C

If a manuscript has received careful attention at the publishing house, then it is either a work of fiction or the work of a renowned figure.

Not supported, because a manuscript that gets careful attention could be a nonfiction one that was requested after careful review of the book proposal.

D

The publishing house is less likely to give careful consideration to a manuscript that was submitted directly by a writer than one that was submitted by a writer’s literary agent.

We don’t know anything about the comparative likelihood of giving careful consideration. Notice that the rule about fiction books doesn’t say anything about careful consideration.

E

Any unrequested manuscripts not submitted by literary agents that the publishing house has published were written by renowned figures.

Supported. If a manuscript is unrequested, and not submitted by a literary agent, then it can’t be a book of fiction. So, it must be a nonfiction book. And if it’s a nonfiction book that’s published, if it’s not requested, then it must be from a renowned figure.

41 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 22

November 17, 2013

If the budget does not allow for more dairy inspectors to be hired, most of the large dairies in the central valley will not meet federal standards governing the disposal of natural wastes, which can seep into streams and groundwater. The new district budget, however, does not allow for the hiring of more dairy inspectors. Consequently, most of the district’s drinking water is likely to become polluted.

Summary

The author concludes that most of the district’s drinking water is likely to become polluted. This is based on the fact taht the new district budget doesn’t allow for hiring of more dairy inspectors, and if that’s the case, then most large dairies in the central valley will not meet federal standards.

Missing Connection

The premises allow us to conclude that most large dairies in the central valley won’t meet federal standards. But how do we get from this inference to the conclusion that most of the district’s drinking water is likely to be polluted? We want to supply the following relationship:
If most large daries in the central valley don’t meet federal standards, then most of the district’s drinking water is likely to be polluted.

A

If most of the dairies in the central valley meet federal standards for the disposal of natural wastes, it is unlikely that most of the district’s drinking water will become polluted.

We’re looking for the claim that if most of the dairies in the central valley DON’T meet federal standards, it’s likely that the water WILL be polluted. (A), however, tells us what happens if most of the dairies DO meet federal standards. This doesn’t establish what happens if most of the dairies DON’T meet federal standards.

B

To keep all the drinking water in the district clean requires more dairy inspectors to monitor the dairies’ disposal of natural wastes.

Even if (B) could establish that we can’t keep “all” of the drinking water clean, this doesn’t guarantee that “most” of the drinking water is likely to be polluted. For example, perhaps only 1% of the water is unclean. This wouldn’t be a situation in which most (over half) of the drinking water is polluted.

C

All of the district’s drinking water is likely to become polluted only if all of the large dairies in the central valley do not meet federal standards for the disposal of natural wastes.

(C) reverses something that would be correct. “Only if” introduces a necessary condition. But we want to know that failure to meet federal standards is sufficient to make most of the drinking water likely to be polluted.

D

Most of the district’s drinking water is likely to become polluted if most of the large dairies in the central valley do not meet federal standards for the disposal of natural wastes.

We know from the premises that most large dairies in the central valley don’t meet federal standards. (D) tells us that if that is the case, most drinking water is likely to be polluted.

E

If none of the large dairies in the central valley meets federal standards for the disposal of natural wastes, most of the district’s drinking water is likely to become polluted.

We do not know from the premises that “none” of the large dairies in the central valley meet federal standards. So the premises would not interact with the conditional in (E). We still would not know whether most of the drinking water is likely to become polluted.

33 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 11

November 17, 2013

A science class stored one selection of various fruits at 30 degrees Celsius, a similar selection in similar conditions at 20 degrees, and another similar selection in similar conditions at 10 degrees. Because the fruits stored at 20 degrees stayed fresh longer than those stored at 30 degrees, and those stored at 10 degrees stayed fresh longest, the class concluded that the cooler the temperature at which these varieties of fruits are stored, the longer they will stay fresh.

Summarize Argument

The class concludes that the colder the storage conditions for these fruits, the longer they will stay fresh. They support this with an experiment in which similar fruits were stored at 30, 20, and 10 degrees in similar conditions. The fruits at 20 degrees lasted longer than those at 30 degrees, and the ones at 10 degrees stayed fresh the longest.

Identify and Describe Flaw

The class’s reasoning is flawed because they draw a broad conclusion based on a small range of temperatures (10-30 degrees). They assume that colder storage always keeps the fruits fresh for longer, ignoring the possibility that there could be temperatures that are too cold. In other words, just because the fruits lasted longer at 10 degrees than at 30 doesn’t mean they’ll last longer at 0 degrees.

A

generalized too readily from the fruits it tested to fruits it did not test

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of hasty generalization. The class doesn't make a generalization about fruits that they did not test. Instead, they draw a conclusion about “these varieties of fruits,” meaning the fruits that they did test.

B

ignored the effects of other factors such as humidity and sunlight on the rate of spoilage

The class doesn’t mention other factors, but it doesn’t need to because the experiment controlled for them. By keeping the other conditions similar for each selection of fruits, the class tested the effect of temperature.

C

too readily extrapolated from a narrow range of temperatures to the entire range of temperatures

The experiment showed that within the narrow range of 10-30 degrees, colder storage keeps the fruits fresh longer. They then apply this to all temperatures, assuming that colder storage always works, without considering that some temperatures might be too cold.

D

assumed without proof that its thermometer was reliable

The class never mentions a thermometer at all. Even if they did, we have no reason to believe that the thermometer might be unreliable. The flaw in the class’s argument has to do with how they apply their experiment’s findings, not with their thermometer.

E

neglected to offer any explanation for the results it discovered

The class concludes that colder storage helps the fruits last longer; they don't need to explain why. Even if they did explain why, this wouldn’t fix the fact that they apply their results too broadly.

9 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 2 - Question 12

November 17, 2013

Though Earth’s human population is increasing, it currently uses only a relatively small fraction of the supply of fresh water. Thus, claims that water shortages will plague humankind in the near future unless population growth trends change are simply mistaken.

Summarize Argument

The author concludes that humankind won’t encounter water shortages in the near future. This is because the human population currently uses only a small portion of the fresh water supply.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes that water shortages are caused exclusively by using too much of the total fresh water supply. This means the author believes that supply is the same everywhere, rather than that certain areas have more available fresh water than others. He also assumes that humans in the near future won’t need to use significantly more of the available fresh water than they do now.

A

Population growth trends are notoriously hard to predict with reasonable accuracy.

The author says that population growth trends really don’t matter. There’s more than enough fresh water to sustain the human population.

B

The amount of fresh water available to meet the needs of Earth’s population varies significantly from region to region.

Not everyone has equal access to fresh water. Population growth in certain regions with little fresh water might indeed cause water shortages if there’s only limited water to go around.

C

Not all of Earth’s population will adopt water conservation methods in the near future.

The author never says people are currently practicing water conservation methods. Thus, we don’t care whether or not they’ll eventually adopt those methods.

D

If Earth’s population continues to increase, it will eventually outstrip all available resources.

We’re talking about the “near future.” This is evidently referring to a much longer time frame.

E

The percentage of fresh water used for agriculture is likely to grow more quickly than is the percentage used for industry.

We have no idea what the relative percentages of agriculture and industry water use are currently. Besides, the author says we have plenty of fresh water as it is. We can’t assume growth in agriculture water use will deplete the fresh water supply.

67 comments