Subscription pricing
http://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-2-question-20/
B is the answer, and the only reason I did not choose it is because it required me to make an assumption that 1. Plankton are not fish (which would require some background knowledge of what plankton are), and 2 particles from the from the mud did not contain fish. Can someone explain this question to me from a different perspective please. Answer A is easy to come by if I knew I was allowed to make such assumptions.
0
8 comments
I believe this is an instance of employing outside knowledge that LSAT clearly wants us to indulge.
Yea, I might have been too analytical with this question, the answer just seemed too easy.
I think it's common knowledge that plankton are not fish (think: SpongeBob), so there is no assumption you have to make here. Also, it would be a huge stretch to believe that the "food particles from bottom mud" contained fish. In any case, B says that jawless fish did not PREY upon other fish. The jawless fish had only 2 means of eating, neither of which were preying on other fish; furthermore, the stim tells us that the development of a jaw changed their lives dramatically because jaws *allowed* them to actively pursue prey. It is the jaws that allowed him to prey upon other fish, so the jawless fish could not have preyed upon other fish.
MBT problem set 5
Ohhh sorry I have pt 17 a hard copy, but let me check.
ps = problem set :) PT17 isn't in the 10 actuals books
this question is from PT 17 S2 Q20
Which PS is this in? Can't seem to find it...