LSAT 149 – Section 4 – Question 06

LSAT 149 - Section 4 - Question 06

December 2017

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:13

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
PT149 S4 Q06
+LR
+Exp
Strengthen +Streng
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
4%
155
B
8%
158
C
83%
164
D
3%
156
E
3%
158
129
142
155
 +Medium 147.325 +SubsectionMedium

Astrophysicist: Gamma ray bursts (GRBs)—explosions of powerful radiation from deep space—have traditionally been classified as either “short” or “long,” terms that reflect the explosion’s relative duration. However, an unusual GRB has been sighted. Its duration was long, but in every other respect it had the properties of a short GRB. Clearly, the descriptive labels “short” and “long” have now outlived their usefulness.

Summarize Argument
The astrophysicist concludes gamma ray bursts (GRBs) should no longer be called “short” or “long.” Why not? Because one recent GRB lasted a long time, but was more like a short GRB in every other way.

Notable Assumptions
The astrophysicist assumes there’s no use in labeling GRBs “short” or “long” if some GRBs are characteristic of the opposite type in every other way. In particular, this means assuming the “short” and “long” labels would only be useful if they always indicate properties of a GRB besides its actual duration.

A
No other GRBs with unusual properties have been sighted.
If anything, this weakens the argument. It suggests keeping the “short” and “long” labels will only lead to issues for a very small number of GRBs.
B
The classification of GRBs can sometimes be made on the basis of duration alone.
If anything, this weakens the argument. It suggests the “short” and “long” labels may still be useful for some GRBs—those for which duration is the distinctive property.
C
Properties other than duration are more important than duration in the proper classification of the unusual GRB.
This implies the “short” and “long” labels are really stand-ins for more important properties of unusual GRBs, which supports the astrophysicist’s contention that they should be abandoned for new labels.
D
GRBs cannot be classified according to the different types of cosmic events that create them.
This is irrelevant. It implies cosmic origin, not duration, is a poor basis for classification.
E
Descriptive labels are easily replaced with nondescriptive labels such as “type I” and “type II.”
This doesn’t mean the descriptive labels “short” and “long” are no longer useful. It’s possible nondescriptive labels would be even less useful than the descriptive ones.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 149 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply