LSAT 141 – Section 4 – Question 17

LSAT 141 - Section 4 - Question 17

September 2014

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:20

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
PT141 S4 Q17
+LR
Weaken +Weak
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
4%
155
B
16%
159
C
75%
164
D
4%
159
E
2%
155
140
150
161
 +Medium 147.542 +SubsectionMedium

A positive correlation has been found between the amount of soot in the atmosphere of cities and the frequency of a certain ailment among those cities’ populations. However, the soot itself probably does not cause this ailment, since in cities where there are large amounts of soot in the air, there are usually also high concentrations of many other air pollutants.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that soot itself doesn’t cause a certain ailment. This is because cities with lots of soot in the air usally also have lots of other pollutants in the air.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the ailment in question isn’t specifically linked to soot and not linked to other pollutants. If this were the case, then soot could likely be identified as a cause of the ailment. The author also assumes that the ailment isn’t prevalent in places where there’s soot in the air but no other pollutants. The author claims soot is usually accompanied by other pollutants, which means there are instances where this isn’t the case.

A
In cities where there are high concentrations of many air pollutants but little if any soot in the air, the frequency of the ailment is just as high, on average, as it is in cities where there are large amounts of soot in the air.
This supports the author’s argument. Other pollutants are likely causing the ailment.
B
If the ailment rarely occurs except in cities in which there are large amounts of soot in the air, then the soot is probably the cause of the ailment.
Does this ever happen? We don’t know.
C
In each of the cities where there are large amounts of soot in the air but little other air pollution, the frequency of the ailment is at least as high as it is anywhere else.
When soot and no other pollutants are in the air, the ailment is as prevalent as ever. Thus, soot seems likely to be the cause of the ailment.
D
If high concentrations of many different pollutants in a city’s air are correlated with a high frequency of the ailment among that city’s population, then it is possible that two or more of those pollutants each causally contributes to the ailment.
This seems to support the author’s argument. Several of the pollutants together could’ve cause the ailment, rather than soot alone.
E
In cities in which there are high concentrations of many air pollutants, there are generally also high concentrations of other forms of pollution that are very likely to contribute causally to the ailment.
This supports the author’s argument. Other forms of pollution are contributing to the ailment rather than soot alone.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 141 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply