LSAT 130 – Section 3 – Question 17

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 17

September 2009

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:08

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
PT130 S3 Q17
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Sampling +Smpl
Part v. Whole +PvW
A
86%
163
B
1%
154
C
10%
160
D
1%
154
E
1%
155
122
137
152
 +Easier 145.135 +SubsectionEasier

A group of mountain climbers was studied to determine how they were affected by diminished oxygen in the air at high altitudes. As they climbed past 6,100 meters above sea level, the climbers slurred words, took longer to understand simple sentences, and demonstrated poor judgment. This combination of worsened performances disproves the theory that the area of the brain controlling speech is distinct from that controlling other functions.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the area of the brain controlling speech is not distinct from the area controlling other functions. He supports this by noting that the mountain climbers in the study slurred their speech, took longer to understand simple sentences, and showed poor judgment after climbing above 6,100 meters.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author concludes that the area of the brain controlling speech isn’t separate from the area controlling other functions because multiple brain functions worsened at high altitudes. He assumes that all these functions are controlled in the same area, ignoring the possibility that multiple areas could have been affected by the altitude.

In other words, the altitude might have impacted multiple distinct brain areas, or the entire brain, affecting both speech and judgment, even though they are controlled in distinct areas.

A
the climbers’ performance in speech, comprehension, and reasoning was impaired because oxygen deprivation affected their entire brains
If oxygen deprivation affected the climbers’ entire brains, then it’s possible that all of the affected functions are controlled in distinct areas of the brain and that oxygen deprivation is simply worsening them all at the same time.
B
the climbers’ performance in speech, comprehension, and reasoning was better than average before they were studied
If the climbers’ speech, comprehension, and reasoning were better than average before the study, it wouldn’t change the fact that these functions worsened at higher altitudes. So, even if the author does overlook (B), it doesn’t describe a flaw in his argument.
C
the climbers showed different levels of impairment in their performance in speech, comprehension, and reasoning
We should expect that the climbers didn't all experience the exact same level of impairment. What’s important is that all the climbers still showed worsened performance in these functions, even if the impairment was at different levels.
D
some of the effects described were apparent just before the climbers reached 6,100 meters
Even if some effects were apparent just before 6,100 meters, (D) doesn't change the fact that the climbers’ experienced worsened performance due to diminished oxygen at high altitudes.
E
many of the climbers had engaged in special training before the climb because they wanted to improve the efficiency with which their bodies use oxygen
The climbers still all experienced worsened performance in speech, understanding, and judgement, regardless of whether some of them had special training for the climb.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 130 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply