LSAT 148 – Section 3 – Question 20

LSAT 148 - Section 3 - Question 20

December 2016

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:14

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 S3 Q20
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Sampling +Smpl
Analogy +An
A
3%
153
B
71%
165
C
15%
158
D
5%
156
E
5%
156
147
155
163
 +Harder 149.233 +SubsectionMedium

Agricultural scientist: Wild apples are considerably smaller than cultivated apples found in supermarkets. In one particular region, archaeologists have looked for remains of cultivated apples dating from 5,000 years ago, around the time people first started cultivating fruit. But the only remains of apples that archaeologists have found from this period are from fruits the same size as the wild apples native to the region. So apples were probably not cultivated in this region 5,000 years ago.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that apples were probably not cultivated in this region 5,000 years ago. This is based on the following:

Today, wild apples are much smaller than cultivated apples found in supermarkets.

In this region, apples of 5,000 years ago were the same size as wild apples native to the region.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that cultivated apples 5,000 years ago must have been larger than wild apples from that time. But this overlooks the possibility that wild apples were similar in size to cultivated apples from that time, even if today wild apples are smaller than cultivated apples.

A
fails to consider that even if a plant was not cultivated in a given region at a specific time, it may have been cultivated in nearby regions at that time
The argument concerns only “this region.” Whether apples were cultivated in other regions does not affect the reasoning of the argument.
B
fails to consider that plants that have been cultivated for only a short time may tend to resemble their wild counterparts much more closely than plants that have been cultivated for a long time
The author overlooks the fact that, 5,000 years ago, cultivated and wild apples might have been more similar in size compared to their relative sizes today. We cannot rely on their relative sizes today to conclude that the smaller apples of 5,000 years ago were not cultivated.
C
takes for granted that all apples are either the size of wild apples or the size of the cultivated apples now found in supermarkets
The argument concerns remains of apples in a particular region that are the same size wild apples. The existence of other apples sized in between wild/cultivated doesn’t weaken the argument. So the author doesn’t need to assume there are only two sizes for apples.
D
employs a premise that is incompatible with the conclusion it is supposed to justify
There is no premise that contradicts the conclusion. The conclusion is that apples probably weren’t cultivated 5,000 years ago in this region. None of the premises makes the conclusion impossible to be true.
E
uses a claim that presupposes the truth of its main conclusion as part of the justification for that conclusion
(E) describes circular reasoning. None of the premises assume the truth of the conclusion. The premises include comparison between sizes of apples today, and a claim about sizes of remains of certain apples. The conclusion is about whether those apples were cultivated.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 148 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply