Sections 3

LSAT 149 - Section 3 - Question 20

March 12, 2018

Michele: In my professional experience, it’s usually not a good idea for a company to overhaul its databases. The rewards rarely exceed the problems experienced along the way, and I’d suggest that anyone considering a database overhaul think twice before proceeding.

Alvaro: But the problems are always caused by a failure to recode the database properly. The best advice for a company considering a database overhaul is to do the job right.

Speaker 1 Summary

Michele concludes that people should think twice before proceeding with a database overhaul. This is because the benefits of an overhaul rarely outweigh the problems of an overhaul.

Speaker 2 Summary

Alvaro asserts that problems of an overhaul are always caused by failing to recode the database properly. Thus, he concludes that a company considering an overhaul should do the overhaul correctly.

Objective

We’re looking for a point of disagreement. A point of disagreement is difficult to predict up front. They seem to disagree over how to approach a database overhaul. Michele recommends strongly considering whether an overhaul is the right decision. Alvaro recommends doing an overhaul correctly, but doesn’t express as much caution about doing the overhaul as Michele does.

A

why companies should consider overhauling their databases

Neither speaker has an opinion. They don’t get into any particular reasons that a company should consider overhauling their databases.

B

whether the problems experienced during a database overhaul ever outweigh the rewards

Alvaro doesn’t have an opinion. He doesn’t discuss the benefits of a database overhaul and whether they ever outweigh the problems.

C

which kinds of database overhauls have more problems than are justified by the rewards

Neither speaker has an opinion. They don’t discuss different kinds of database overhauls or which kinds have more problems than benefits.

D

what a company should do when considering a database overhaul

This is a point of disagreement. Michele thinks companies should think twice before proceeding. In other words, they should strongly consider not doing the overhaul. Alvaro recommends something different. To him, the best advice for companies is to do the overhaul correctly.

E

when professional experience is required to correctly recode a database

Neither speaker has an opinion. They don’t discuss the need for professional experience to recode a database.

4 comments

LSAT 83 - Section 3 - Question 16

March 12, 2018

18 comments

LSAT 149 - Section 3 - Question 16

March 12, 2018

24 comments

LSAT 83 - Section 3 - Question 15

March 12, 2018

32 comments

LSAT 149 - Section 3 - Question 15

March 12, 2018

There is a popular view among literary critics that a poem can never be accurately paraphrased because a poem is itself the only accurate expression of its meaning. But these same critics hold that their own paraphrases of particular poems are accurate. Thus, their view that poetry cannot be accurately paraphrased is false.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

The author concludes that the view that poetry cannot be accurately paraphrased is false. This is based on the fact that certain critics who hold that view also hold another view that their own paraphrases of some poems are accurate.

Identify and Describe Flaw

The author points out that the critics who believe a poem cannot be accurately paraphrased hold a contradictory view — that some of their own paraphrases of poems are accurate. But we don’t know which of these views is true, if any. The author assumes that the critics’ own paraphrases of poems are accurate. But it’s possible that the paraphrases are not accurate and that the critics’ view that poems can’t be accurately paraphrased is true. We don’t know which of the critics’ beliefs is true.

A

presupposes the falsity of the view that it sets out to refute

The author does not presuppose, on the way to reaching her conclusion, that the view poems can’t be accurately paraphrased is false. Rather, the author assumes that the critics have accurately paraphrased poems, which, if true, would show that poems can be accurately paraphrased.

B

takes for granted that the main purpose of poems is to convey information rather than express feelings

The author’s reasoning doesn’t relate to the purpose of poems. The issue is whether poems can accurately be paraphrased. Why poems are written or why they are read has no bearing on the argument.

C

takes for granted that a paraphrase of a poem cannot be useful to its readers unless it accurately expresses a poem’s meaning

The author’s reasoning doesn’t relate to the usefulness of a paraphrase. The issue is whether poems can be accurately paraphrased. Whether this paraphrasing is ever useful to a reader has no bearing on the argument.

D

provides no justification for favoring one of the literary critics’ beliefs over the other

The author gave no reason for favoring the view that the critics’ paraphrases are accurate. The author simply assumes that this view is true. This overlooks that the contradictory view could be the one that is true; perhaps poems can’t be paraphrased accurately.

E

provides no justification for following one particular definition of “paraphrase”

It’s not clear that the author is using any definition of “paraphrase” other than the dictionary definition. And it’s not flawed to use the dictionary definition of a word, unless we have some reason to use a different definition.

37 comments

LSAT 83 - Section 3 - Question 12

March 12, 2018

57 comments

LSAT 149 - Section 3 - Question 12

March 12, 2018

In a scene in an ancient Greek play, Knights, the character Demosthenes opens a writing tablet on which an oracle had written a prophecy, and while looking at the tablet, he continuously expresses his amazement at its contents. His companion presses him for information, whereupon Demosthenes explains what the oracle had written.

Summary

In a scene in one ancient Greek play, a character (Demosthenes) opens a tablet and expresses amazement at what was written on it.

Demosthenes’s companion requests information in response to his reaction.

Demosthenes explains to his companion what was written on the tablet.

Notable Valid Inferences

In this scene, Demosthenes did not read the prophecy out loud.

A

In ancient Greek plays, characters are presumed to know how to read unless their illiteracy is specifically mentioned.

This could be true. We only know what happened in one specific scene in one play. Further, neither character’s illiteracy is specifically mentioned, so according to (A), both characters would be presumed to know how to read. This presumption isn’t rejected by the stimulus.

B

The character of Demosthenes in Knights is not based on a historical figure.

This could be true. We have no information to support or reject this claim.

C

In ancient Greek plays, the reading aloud of written texts commonly occurred as part of the on-stage action.

This could be true. We only have information about one scene in one play where something was read silently; we don’t know whether or not reading out loud occurred commonly.

D

In ancient Greece, people did not read silently to themselves.

The stimulus provides evidence against this. We can reject the claim in (D) because the stimulus provides an indication that someone read silently. (D) says that reading silently never happened, and the stimulus provides an example of it happening, so the stimulus rejects (D).

E

Only rarely in ancient Greece were prophecies written down on writing tablets.

This could be true. We only know what happened in this scene in this one play; we don’t know how commonly prophecies were written down in ancient Greece. We don’t have the information to reject this claim.

73 comments

LSAT 83 - Section 3 - Question 10

March 12, 2018

19 comments

LSAT 149 - Section 3 - Question 10

March 12, 2018

The prehistoric fish Tiktaalik is the earliest known animal with fingers. Since variations were so great among prehistoric fish species, Tiktaalik would not have stood out as unusual at the time. However, Tiktaalik’s fingers were an important development in animal evolution because it is likely that Tiktaalik is an ancestor to the many land animals with fingers.

Summary

Tiktaalik is a prehistoric fish. Tiktaalik is the earliest known animal with fingers. Tiktaalik would not have stood out as unusual since variations were great among prehistoric fish. Tiktaalik is likely an ancestor to the land animals that have fingers.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

Land animals with fingers today likely trace their ancestry back to a prehistoric fish. Comparing Tiktaalik to other fish at its time would not reveal its evolutionary importance.

A

Tiktaalik likely used its fingers to move on land.

This is unsupported because we don’t know where Tiktaalik lived, and its life may have been confined to the sea.

B

Tiktaalik’s fingers were its only feature to play a significant role in the development of modern land animals.

This is unsupported because the author never reveals if Tiktaalik also had other features that were unique or significant. The discussion is confined to its fingers.

C

Tiktaalik is not the ancestor of any currently surviving fish species.

This is unsupported because Tiktaalik may have had several descendants of fish, either with or without fingers.

D

No fish without fingers would ever be able to move on land.

This is unsupported because there may be other appendages besides fingers that could enable a fish to move on land.

E

The evolutionary significance of Tiktaalik could not be determined just through comparison to fish species of its time.

This is strongly supported because comparing Tiktaalik to other fish wouldn’t yield significant results since many different fish had unique characteristics. The evolutionary significance of Tiktaalik comes from its later land ancestors with fingers.

22 comments

LSAT 82 - Section 3 - Passage 4 - Questions

November 22, 2017

15 comments