LSAT 112 – Section 4 – Question 13

LSAT 112 - Section 4 - Question 13

December 2001

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:12

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
PT112 S4 Q13
+LR
+Exp
Argument part +AP
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
Lack of Support v. False Conclusion +LSvFC
Fact v. Belief v. Knowledge +FvBvK
A
5%
160
B
91%
167
C
1%
158
D
2%
157
E
1%
162
130
141
152
 +Easier 142.561 +SubsectionEasier

Joseph: My encyclopedia says that the mathematician Pierre de Fermat died in 1665 without leaving behind any written proof for a theorem that he claimed nonetheless to have proved. Probably this alleged theorem simply cannot be proved, since—as the article points out—no one else has been able to prove it. Therefore it is likely that Fermat was either lying or else mistaken when he made his claim.

Laura: Your encyclopedia is out of date. Recently someone has in fact proved Fermat’s theorem. And since the theorem is provable, your claim—that Fermat was lying or mistaken—clearly is wrong.

Summarize Argument
Joseph's main conclusion is that Fermat was lying or mistaken when he claimed to have proved his theorem. Joseph believes this because no one has been able to prove the theorem since Fermat's time, suggesting that it might be impossible to prove.

Identify Argument Part
This is a sub-conclusion that supports Joseph’s main conclusion that Fermat was either lying or mistaken in proving his theory.

A
an assumption for which no support is offered
This is factually incorrect. Joesph provides support that “no one else has been able to prove it”
B
a subsidiary conclusion on which his argument’s main conclusion is based
This is a sub-conclusion that is supported by the premise that no one else has been able to solve the theorem. Then, it supports the main conclusion that Fermat was lying or mistaken.
C
a potential objection that his argument anticipates and attempts to answer before it is raised
This is not an objection that Joseph anticipates or answers. It is a sub-conclusion on which he bases his main conclusion.
D
the principal claim that his argument is structured to refute
This is factually inaccurate. Joseph believes that no one else could solve this theorem. That is why he argues that Fermat was mistaken or lying.
E
background information that neither supports nor undermines his argument’s conclusion
This supports the argument’s main conclusion that Fermat was mistaken or lying. It is not just background information.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 112 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply