LSAT 148 – Section 1 – Question 20

LSAT 148 - Section 1 - Question 20

December 2016

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

Target time: 1:09

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
PT148 S1 Q20	+LR	Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method Sampling +Smpl Lack of Support v. False Conclusion +LSvFC	A 57% 165 B 23% 160 C 7% 156 D 3% 155 E 11% 158	152 160 168	+Hardest	142.771 +SubsectionEasier

Patterson: Bone flutes dating to the Upper Paleolithic are the earliest evidence for music. Thus it is likely that music first arose during this period.

Garza: But the Upper Paleolithic is exceptional for the intensive use of bone, which typically survives well in archaeological contexts, unlike other materials commonly used for musical instruments, such as wood.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

Garza disputes Patterson’s conclusion that music likely first arose in the Upper Paleolithic era. Patterson’s reasoning is that bone flutes from this period are the earliest evidence of music. In response, Garza points out that bone, which preserves well, is unusually prevalent in Upper Paleolithic artifacts. Earlier instruments made from less durable materials, like wood, would be less likely to survive.
She implies that music could have existed earlier, but, if so, evidence of it wouldn’t survive due to the perishable nature of the materials used. Thus, even though there are no surviving earlier musical artifacts, there could have been earlier music.

Describe Method of Reasoning

Garza argues that Patterson lacks enough evidence to reach his conclusion. Patterson relies on the set of all currently discovered ancient tools. But Garza says that, because some ancient tools may not have survived to the present, this sample isn’t definitive enough to support his conclusion.
Note that she isn’t saying that Patterson’s conclusion has to be false. It could be true, but he doesn’t have enough evidence to support it.

arguing that the body of evidence to which Patterson appeals is insufficient for Patterson’s purposes

To reach his conclusion, Patterson relies on the set of all discovered ancient tools, which Garza argues is insufficient. She contends that pre-Upper Paleolithic musical instruments made out of non-bone materials might not have survived long enough to be discovered.

offering evidence to challenge the truth of the premise of Patterson’s argument

Garza doesn’t challenge the truth of Patterson’s premise (bone flutes are the earliest discovered musical instruments). She challenges its significance: even if true, it isn’t sufficient to reach his conclusion.

presenting a counterexample to the general conclusion drawn in Patterson’s argument

Garza presents hypothetical reasons to doubt Patterson’s conclusion, not a specific counterexample. A counterexample would be e.g. an actual pre-paleolithic wooden flute.

presenting an argument analogous to Patterson’s argument to reveal a potential flaw in Patterson’s reasoning

Garza provides direct reason to doubt Patterson’s reasoning; she doesn’t use an analogy.

using Patterson’s evidence to draw a conclusion inconsistent with the conclusion drawn in Patterson’s argument

Garza’s reasoning isn’t based on Patterson’s evidence (Upper Paleolithic bone flutes). It’s based on new considerations (the perishability of non-bone materials) not present in Patterson’s argument.

LSAT 148 – Section 1 – Question 20

LSAT 148 - Section 1 - Question 20

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 148 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Leave a Reply Cancel