LSAT 144 – Section 3 – Question 09

LSAT 144 - Section 3 - Question 09

October 2015

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:39

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
PT144 S3 Q09
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Lack of Support v. False Conclusion +LSvFC
A
80%
163
B
8%
160
C
4%
156
D
2%
158
E
5%
160
121
139
156
 +Easier 145.106 +SubsectionEasier

Astronomer: Proponents of the hypothesis that life evolved extraterrestrially and drifted here in spores point out that, 3.8 billion years ago, Earth was bombarded by meteorites that would have destroyed any life already here. Yet 3.5 billion years ago, Earth had life forms complex enough to leave fossil remains. Such life could not have evolved here in the 0.3 billion years following the meteorite bombardments, they claim. There is good reason to regard their hypothesis as false, however, for they merely offer empirical arguments against the view that life evolved on Earth; neither they nor anyone else has provided positive support for the extraterrestrial-spore theory of the origin of terrestrial life.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that there is good reason to regard as false the view that life evolved outside of Earth and drifted to Earth on spores. This is based on the fact that proponents of this view have not offered positive support for their view. Rather, they offer only arguments against the view that life evolved on Earth.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the proponents’ failure to provide evidence for their theory constitutes a reason to think their view is false. This overlooks the fact that their view can be true, despite the proponents’ failure to offer evidence for it.

A
concludes, simply because there is no evidence in favor of a hypothesis, that there is evidence against that hypothesis
The author thinks the fact proponents haven’t offered evidence in favor of their view constitutes a reason to think their view is false.
B
fails to justify its claim that the view being criticized is inherently implausible
The author doesn’t claim that the proponents’ view is “inherently” implausible. The author’s reasoning is based on the fact proponents haven’t offered evidence for it.
C
reasons that a hypothesis is false simply because there is another hypothesis that is equally likely to be true
The author doesn’t point out another hypothesis that is “equally likely” to be true.
D
attempts to derive a conclusion from premises that contradict it
The author’s premises do not contradict the conclusion. The premises establish that the proponents haven’t offered evidence for their view. This doesn’t contradict the claim that the proponents’ view is false.
E
grants the truth of claims that are made by the advocates of the hypothesis but that do nothing to strengthen the astronomer’s own argument
The author doesn’t accept the claims of the proponents as true. He simply describes those claims in the first half of the stimulus. But the author then rejects the proponents’ hypothesis because they haven’t offered positive evidence for it.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 144 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply