LSAT 135 – Section 2 – Question 21

LSAT 135 - Section 2 - Question 21

December 2011

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:47

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
PT135 S2 Q21
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
A
3%
154
B
4%
155
C
2%
153
D
1%
155
E
90%
164
135
143
151
 +Medium 146.729 +SubsectionMedium

A good way to get over one’s fear of an activity one finds terrifying is to do it repeatedly. For instance, over half of people who have parachuted only once report being extremely frightened by the experience, while less than 1 percent of those who have parachuted ten times or more report being frightened by it.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author concludes that a good way to get over one’s fear of an activity is to do that activity repeatedly. This is based on the fact that over half of people who have parachuted only once report being frightened by parachuting, but less than 1 percent of those who have parachute ten times or more report being frightened of it.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the reason so few people who parachute ten times or more report being frightened by parachuting is that repeated parachuting has reduced their fear. This overlooks the possibility that those people weren’t afraid to begin with. Their lack of fear might be what causes them to parachute many times.

A
takes for granted that the greater the number of dangerous activities one engages in the less one is frightened by any one of them
The argument doesn’t concern a “greater number of dangerous activities.” It’s about one’s fear of one activity and whether doing that one activity more can reduce one’s fear of that activity.
B
neglects to consider those people who have parachuted more than once but fewer than ten times
The statistic already shows that people who parachute many times report being less frightened than people who parachute only once. The flaw concerns the author’s causal assumption, not the lack of info about people who parachuted between one and ten times.
C
takes for granted that people do not know how frightening something is unless they have tried it
The argument doesn’t concern people’s awareness of how frightening something is. It’s about whether people are frightened of an activity and whether doing that activity more reduces fear. Knowledge of one’s level of fear is a separate issue.
D
fails to take into account the possibility that people would be better off if they did not do things that terrify them
Whether people would be better off is irrelevant. The argument concerns whether doing an activity more reduces fear of that activity. The author did not conclude that doing a feared activity is a good idea or that it should be done.
E
overlooks the possibility that most people who have parachuted many times did not find it frightening initially
This possibility, if true, presents an alternate explanation for the statistics cited. Perhaps people’s lack of fear is what allowed them to parachute ten times. This undermines the author’s hypothesis, which is that parachuting ten times is what reduced their fear.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 135 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply