LSAT 107 – Section 1 – Question 14

LSAT 107 - Section 1 - Question 14

October 1999

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:30

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
PT107 S1 Q14
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Eliminating Options +ElimOpt
A
3%
155
B
1%
160
C
7%
163
D
9%
159
E
80%
165
129
144
159
 +Medium 147.515 +SubsectionMedium

J.Y.’s explanation

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

Prosecutor: Dr. Yuge has testified that, had the robbery occurred after 1:50 A.M., then, the moon having set at 1:45 A.M., it would have been too dark for Klein to recognize the perpetrator. But Yuge acknowledged that the moon was full enough to provide considerable light before it set. And we have conclusively shown that the robbery occurred between 1:15 and 1:30 A.M. So there was enough light for Klein to make a reliable identification.

Summarize Argument

The prosecutor concludes that there was enough light for Klein to make a reliable identification. He supports this with the fact that the moon was full enough to provide considerable light before it set, and that the robbery happened before the moon set.

Identify and Describe Flaw

The prosecutor assumes that there was enough light for Klein to identify the robber because the robbery happened before the moon set and the moon was full enough to provide considerable light. But just because the moon provided considerable light doesn’t mean that it provided enough for Klein to identify the robber. There could be other reasons the light wasn’t sufficient at that time, even with the nearly full moon.

A
Klein may be mistaken about the time of the robbery and so it may have taken place after the moon had set.

The prosecutor doesn’t overlook this possibility. One of his premises states that he has “conclusively shown” when the robbery took place. This fact doesn’t necessarily rely on Klein’s memory at all, because it’s already been established.

B
The perpetrator may closely resemble someone who was not involved in the robbery.

This may be true, but it doesn’t affect whether there was enough light for Klein to be able to identify the perpetrator. The prosecutor doesn’t conclude that Klein correctly identified the perpetrator, just that there was enough light for him to make an identification.

C
Klein may have been too upset to make a reliable identification even in good light.

Like (B), this may be true, but it doesn’t affect the conclusion. Even if Klein was too upset and didn’t make an identification at all, it wouldn’t impact whether there was enough light for him to be able to do so.

D
Without having been there, Dr. Yuge has no way of knowing whether the light was sufficient.

Dr. Yuge simply “acknowledged that the moon was full enough to provide considerable light before it set.” He never claims that the light was sufficient, only the prosecutor makes that claim.

E
During the robbery the moon’s light may have been interfered with by conditions such as cloud cover.

Just because the nearly full moon provided considerable light doesn’t mean that light was sufficient for Klein to make an identification. Perhaps other factors interfered with the light, making it insufficient despite the nearly full moon.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 107 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply