LSAT 124 – Section 3 – Question 23

LSAT 124 - Section 3 - Question 23

December 2007

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

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
PT124 S3 Q23	+LR	Parallel method of reasoning +Para Rule-Application +RuleApp	A 6% 159 B 2% 159 C 15% 159 D 72% 166 E 4% 158	147 156 164	+Harder	145.896 +SubsectionMedium

The question stem reads: The reasoning in which of the following is most similar to that in the naturalist's argument? This is a Parallel question.

The naturalist begins by claiming that a species can survive the change in an environment as long as the change is not too rapid. The naturalist has provided a general rule saying that the change can be ok for a species, with the caveat that the change does not occur too rapidly. The naturalist concludes that the threats humans create to woodland species arise not from cutting down trees but from the rate at which we are cutting down trees. The naturalist has applied the universal rule about species to the specific example of woodland species. So the problem is not that change we are creating by cutting down trees, but the because we are causing the change too rapidly.

When evaluating an answer choice, we need a universal rule with a caveat. The correct AC will apply that universal rule to a specific example and say that the specific example is failing to satisfy the caveat.

Answer Choice (A) is incorrect. (A) does not provide a universal rule; it only gives a specific rule about fossil fuels. Additionally, (A) 's rule about fossil fuels lacks the caveat we are looking for.

Answer Choice (B) is incorrect. We can quickly eliminate (B) because of the word "many." Remember, we need a universal rule, so if (B) was right, it would begin with "all people." Additionally, (B) 's rule lacks the caveat we are looking for, nor does (B) apply its rule to a specific example.

Answer Choice (C) is incorrect. Similar to (B), we can eliminate (C) because it says "some" when we are looking for a universal rule. Additionally, (C) also lacks the caveat, nor does (C) apply the rule to a specific example.

Correct Answer Choice (D) matches the stimulus. (D) provides a general rule that "people do not fear change," under the caveat people know what the change will bring. (D) then applies that rule to the specific example of the author's company's employees. The company's employees' fears arise from the fact the company is changing, but because they do not know what the change will bring (the caveat is not satisfied).

Answer Choice (E) is incorrect. (E) does not provide a general rule, so we can eliminate it.

LSAT 124 – Section 3 – Question 23

LSAT 124 - Section 3 - Question 23

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

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 124 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel