LSAT 117 – Section 2 – Question 24

LSAT 117 - Section 2 - Question 24

October 2004

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

Target time: 1:26

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
PT117 S2 Q24
+LR
Argument part +AP
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
2%
154
B
7%
159
C
13%
158
D
25%
159
E
53%
165
152
161
170
 +Hardest 146.765 +SubsectionMedium

Psychologist: Some psychologists mistakenly argue that because dreams result from electrical discharges in the brain, they must be understood purely in terms of their physiological function. They conclude, against Freud, that dreams reveal nothing about the character of the dreamer. But since dream content varies enormously, then even if electrical discharges provide the terms of the physiological explanation of dreams, they cannot completely explain the phenomenon of dreaming.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The psychologist concludes that physiological functions alone cannot explain the phenomenon of dreaming. As support for her conclusion, the psychologist cites the fact that dream content varies enormously. This psychologist disagrees with other psychologists, who conclude that dreams are purely physiological and reveal nothing about the dreamer’s character.

Identify Argument Part
The claim in the question stem is a premise that supports the psychologist’s conclusion and casts doubt on the conclusion of the other psychologists (who believe that dreams can be explained purely in physiological terms).

A
It is used to support the anti-Freudian conclusion that some psychologists draw concerning dreams.
The anti-Freudian conclusion is the view of other psychologists; that is not the conclusion of this argument. Our psychologist disagrees with the anti-Freudian conclusion. The claim in the question stem supports our psychologist’s conclusion, not the view of other psychologists.
B
It is used to support the explicitly stated conclusion that a fully satisfactory account of dreams must allow for the possibility of their revealing significant information about the dreamer.
The conclusion mentioned in (B) may be implied but it is not the psychologist’s explicit conclusion; the psychologist just concludes that physiological explanations of dreams are incomplete. The conclusion mentioned in (B) is not explicitly stated.
C
It is used to suggest that neither Freud’s theory nor the theory of anti-Freudian psychologists can completely explain the phenomenon of dreaming.
The claim in the question stem is used to demonstrate that the anti-Freudian theory is incomplete, but it is not used to suggest anything regarding the completeness of the Freudian theory.
D
It is used to illustrate the difficulty of providing a complete explanation of the phenomenon of dreaming.
The difficulty of explaining dreaming is not a consideration of the argument; we only learn about one method of explaining dreams that is incomplete. The psychologist is not arguing that anything is difficult.
E
It is used to undermine a claim that some psychologists use to argue against a view of Freud’s.
The claim in the question stem undermines the claim that physiological explanations are enough to explain the phenomenon of dreaming; this endorsement of physiological explanations is what some psychologists use to argue against Freud’s theory.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 117 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply