Self-study
Charlene: Environmental cleanup increasingly relies on microorganisms to metabolize pollutants. ████ ███ ███ ████████████ ███████ █████ ████████ ██████ ████ ██████ ████ █ ████████ ███████████ █████ █████ ███████
█████ █ █████ █████ ██████ ██████ ███████████ ████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ███████████ ███████ ████████ ███ ██████ ███████ ██████ ██ █████████ ████ ██████ █████████ ██████████ ███ █████ ████ ██████ ███ ███████████ ████████ ███ ███ ██ ██████ ███ ████ █████
Objective: Miscellaneous?!?
What kind of question is this? It doesn’t fit cleanly into any of the common question types. But! It’s also a great example of how much critical information question stems often provide. This stem alone tells us:
- We can expect two viewpoints in the stimulus, and one will respond to the other
- Olaf’s viewpoint will be flawed (and more specifically, he will equivocate)
- Our job is to identify the term on which Olaf equivocates
So it’s a rare blend of the Disagree and Flaw / Descriptive Weakening question types. Better than that, though, it’s a question where we’re hunting for equivocation.
Equivocation often reads like a pun. Like maybe a billboard says “Looking for a sign? This is it!” Get it? Because sign can mean omen but also the billboard is a literal sign! Get it? That’s our test in these answer choices.
Argument Summary
We can’t thoroughly summarize the argument without spoiling the answer choices, so here’s the super abstract gist:
Charlene says microbes aren’t a cure-all for pollution because temperature drops make them worse. Olaf disagrees and cites studies showing that cold microbes and warm microbes are roughly the same.
10.
Olaf's reply suggests that he █████████████ ██████████ ███ ██ ███ ████
a
relies
Charlene uses “relies” to mean “uses”: cleanup efforts are using microorganisms more and more. Olaf’s reply is consistent with that, though. “Relies” is a term with stable enough meaning that it’s hard to generate a good example of equivocation. Maybe Olaf suggests cleanup efforts literally lean on microorganisms or something.
b
normal
The rightness of (B) should shed light on the wrongness of the other answers. Charlene uses normal to mean normal for the region. Like “it’s usually instant-death hot here in the Sahara, but the temperature is lower than normal, so it’s only torturously hot today.”
Olaf counters with evidence comparing microbes from two regions with different temperatures (Arctic temps are lower than subtropical temps). This doesn’t address Charlene’s argument about temperature drops within a given region.
But Olaf was trying to make sense, and the best way to explain his reasoning is that he was trying to undermine the idea that microorganisms are less effective when a region’s temperature drops below what’s normal on the planet earth. “Arctic temperatures aren’t normal, and these microorganisms are doing just fine!”
c
cleanup
Charlene uses cleanup to mean “getting rid of” pollutants, like how you clean up trash. Olaf’s evidence is consistent with that – his talk of microbes eating oil refers to the same goal of cleaning up / getting rid of pollutants.
Equivocating on “cleanup” would be Olaf saying “microbes are perfectly capable of making our environment nice and tidy and orderly!”
d
limitations
Charlene uses limitations to mean “downsides”, or to suggest microorganisms aren’t a complete solution to all our pollutant problems.
Olaf’s rebuttal addresses that contention cleanly – he’s arguing that microorganisms are not subject to the limitation Charlene presents.
e
active
There’s certainly a difference in terminology between Charlene’s argument, which talks about microbes being active, and Olaf’s argument, which talks about microbes eating oil. And plenty of LSAT questions demand that you notice that difference – “Olaf assumes eating oil is the same as activity!”
But this question isn’t about whether these concepts are the same – it’s about whether these two authors treat them the same. Charlene uses “active” to mean “metabolizing pollutants”, and Olaf’s evidence also measures the rate at which microbes metabolize pollutants.