LSAT 106 – Section 2 – Question 21

LSAT 106 - Section 2 - Question 21

June 1999

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:02

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
PT106 S2 Q21
+LR
+Exp
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Lack of Support v. False Conclusion +LSvFC
A
11%
159
B
2%
153
C
3%
154
D
83%
166
E
1%
158
142
150
159
 +Medium 147.566 +SubsectionMedium

Wirth: All efforts to identify a gene responsible for predisposing people to manic-depression have failed. In fact, nearly all researchers now agree that there is no “manic-depression gene.” Therefore, if these researchers are right, any claim that some people are genetically predisposed to manic-depression is simply false.

Chang: I do not dispute your evidence, but I take issue with your conclusion. Many of the researchers you refer to have found evidence that a set of several genes is involved and that complex interactions among these genes produce a predisposition to manic-depression.

Speaker 1 Summary
Wirth claims that if researchers are correct in their findings, it must be false that some people are predisposed to manic-depression. As support, Wirth explains that no “manic-depression gene” has been identified, and that most researchers agree that no such gene exists.

Speaker 2 Summary
Chang disagrees with Wirth’s conclusion, meaning Chang believes that the researchers’ results are compatible with a predisposition to manic-depression. How so? Because although researchers haven’t found a single gene responsible, they have identified multiple genes whose interactions can predispose someone to manic-depression.

Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. One disagreement between Wirth and Chang is whether current research findings indicate that people can be predisposed to manic-depression or not.

A
efforts to identify a gene or set of several genes responsible for predisposing people to manic-depression have all failed
Both speakers agree with this claim. Similar to (C), Wirth states this as a fact, and Chang accepts the evidence used by Wirth.
B
it is likely that researchers will ever be able to find a single gene that predisposes people to manic-depression
Neither speaker explicitly speculates about the future change of finding a single “manic-depression gene.” If anything, both speakers likely disagree with this claim: each seems to take for granted that no single “manic-depression gene” exists.
C
nearly all researchers now agree that there is no manic-depression gene
Like (A), the speakers both agree with this claim. This is one of the facts Wirth uses as support, and Chang accepts that Wirth’s support is true. The disagreement is about the conclusion, not the evidence.
D
current research supports the claim that no one is genetically predisposed to manic-depression
Wirth agrees with this claim but Chang disagrees, making it the point at issue. Wirth believes that the absence of a single “manic-depression gene” means there can be no predisposition; Chang thinks a predisposition can still exist due to the interaction between multiple genes.
E
the efforts made to find a gene that can produce a predisposition to manic-depression were thorough
Neither speaker explicitly discusses the thoroughness of researchers’ attempts to find a “manic-depression gene,” but both seem to accept that no such gene exists. The rigor of scientists’ approach is not an issue between Wirth and Chang.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 106 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply