LSAT 127 – Section 1 – Question 10

LSAT 127 - Section 1 - Question 10

December 2003

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:59

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
PT127 S1 Q10
+LR
+Exp
Main conclusion or main point +MC
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
9%
159
B
3%
155
C
1%
152
D
86%
163
E
0%
147
129
141
153
 +Easier 147.168 +SubsectionMedium

J.Y.’s explanation

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

Prediction, the hallmark of the natural sciences, appears to have been made possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions. Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction. But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author claims that reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions in the social sciences would be a mistake, despite what some social scientists assume. The predictions would leave out social science data that is not easy to reduce to those expressions, so the predictions of social phenomena would be inaccurate.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s opinion of using reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions in the social sciences: “this would be a mistake;”

A
The social sciences do not have as much predictive power as the natural sciences.
The author does not discuss predictive power, only what is compatible with being reduced to mathematical formulas for prediction.
B
Mathematics plays a more important role in the natural sciences than it does in the social sciences.
The author does not claim where math plays a more important role. He only claims that reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions for prediction purposes in the social sciences is a mistake.
C
There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict.
This is not contained in the stimulus. As part of the context, we know some social scientists want the power to predict accurately, but that is all. We don’t know anything about a need for improvement,
D
Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.
This accurately paraphrases the conclusion. The author says “this” (reducing phenomena in the social to mathematical expressions) “would be a mistake” (should not happen).
E
Prediction is responsible for the success of the natural sciences.
In the context, we are told prediction is the “hallmark” of the natural sciences. This is an inaccurate paraphrase of that context.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 127 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply