LSAT 103 – Section 3 – Question 02

LSAT 103 - Section 3 - Question 02

September 1998

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:29

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
PT103 S3 Q02
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
A
1%
155
B
93%
167
C
5%
159
D
1%
155
E
0%
136
144
152
 +Medium 148.537 +SubsectionMedium

From the tenth century until around the year 1500, there were Norse settlers living in Greenland. During that time, average yearly temperatures fell slightly worldwide, and some people claim that this temperature drop wiped out the Norse settlements by rendering Greenland too cold for human habitation. But this explanation cannot be correct, because Inuit settlers from North America, who were living in Greenland during the time the Norse settlers were there, continued to thrive long after 1500.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author looks to the disappearance of Norse settlements and concludes, contrary to what some people claim, that the Norse settlements did not disappear as a result of decreasing temperatures. As evidence, the author points out that Inuit settlers inhabiting Greenland during the same time continued to thrive long after the Norse settlers disappeared.

Describe Method of Reasoning
The author counters a position held by others. She does this by providing evidence that is inconsistent with what others claim. Decreasing temperatures could not have been what caused Norse settlements to disappear because Inuit settlements during the same time period were not wiped out.

A
denying the relevance of an analogy
The author does not describe any analogy. The author’s mention of Inuit settlements is a counterexample meant to attack the claim that the Norse settlements were wiped out by decreasing temperatures.
B
producing evidence that is inconsistent with the claim being opposed
The evidence the author produces is that of the Inuit settlements in existence at the same time as the Norse settlements. The claim being opposed is that Greenland became too cold for human habitation.
C
presenting an alternative explanation that purports to account for more of the known facts
The author does not present an alternative explanation. She does not attempt to explain why the Norse settlements in Greenland disappeared.
D
citing a general rule that undermines the claim being opposed
The author does not provide a general rule in order to counter other’s claims. Rather, the author provides the specific instance of Inuit settlements to oppose these claims.
E
redefining a term in a way that is favorable to the argument’s conclusion
The author does not redefine a term, or define any term used.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 103 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply