Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 148 - Section 3 - Question 10
July 25, 2014
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that we need to adopt the alternate code. This is because the traditional code contains a lot of obscure, unnecessary rules, which lead to debates over procedural details, which in turn leads to a decline in public confidence in the council. Public confidence is necessary for the council to be successful. In addition, the alternate code has been used successfully elsewhere.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that there are no downsides to the alternate code that would outweigh the harm caused by the traditional code. The author also assumes that, if we want to avoid the problems of the traditional code, there’s no other option besides adopting the alternate code.
A
The council’s use of the problematic rules in the traditional code is intermittent.
Whether the problematic rules are used intermittently or continuously, there are still negative aspects of the traditional rule. The fact a problem might occur intermittently does not suggest the problem is minor or does not need to be fixed.
B
Those who have adopted the alternate code sometimes attempt to use it to obscure their opponents’ understanding of procedures.
Attempts to use the other code to confuse opponents does not suggest these attempts are successful or that they would lead to the same debates and decline in public confidence that the traditional rules lead to.
C
Revision of the traditional code is underway that will eliminate the problematic rules.
This undermines the assumption that avoiding the problem of the traditional code requires adopting the alternate one. (C) presents an alternative — if we can just remove the problematic rules from the traditional code, then it’s no longer “imperative” to adopt the alternate code.
D
It is not always reasonable to adopt a different code in order to maintain the public’s confidence.
We get a specific reason to think that changing codes to maintain public confidence is reasonable here — the council’s success depends on the public’s having confidence. Changing might not always be reasonable, but the author gives a specific reason to think it may be here.
E
The alternate code contains few provisions that have thus far been criticized as obscure or unnecessary.
(E) tells us that the alternate code doesn’t have many provisions that are criticized as obscure/unnecessary. This is a point in favor of the alternate code, because we know the traditional code has a “large number” of obscure/unnecessary rules.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 44 - Section 4 - Question 10
March 16, 2014Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 117 - Section 4 - Question 10
March 16, 2014Council member Q: To think that there is a lot of pollution based on the discovery of a serious single instance of pollution is simply an application of the widely accepted principle that actions tend to follow the path of least resistance, and it is surely easier to pollute than not to pollute.
Speaker 1 Summary
P supports an unstated conclusion that alarmists do not have sufficient support to conclude that pollution is a major character fault of society. By explaining that alarmists fail to distinguish polluting behavior from people’s tendency not to pollute, P implies that a societal character flaw of pollution does not follow from specific instances of pollution.
Speaker 2 Summary
Q indicates an unstated conclusion that alarmists’ claim is reasonably supported. Q supports this by explaining that actions generally follow the path of least resistance, and it is easier to pollute than not to pollute. This implies that a single incident of pollution is good evidence that more people will be doing the easy thing and polluting.
Objective
We need to find a disagreement. P and Q disagree about whether or not pollution indicates that people generally tend to pollute.
A
pollution should be considered a problem
Neither speaker directly claims that pollution should or shouldn’t be considered a problem. Both P and Q’s arguments are consistent with the idea that pollution is problematic; the dispute is about how widespread we should believe pollution is, not whether it’s a problem.
B
actions tend to follow the path of least resistance
Q makes this claim, but P never disagrees. In fact, P does not express any opinion about whether actions tend to follow the path of least resistance or some other path.
C
people are responsible for pollution
D
people can change their behavior and not pollute
Neither speaker talks about whether polluters can or cannot change their behavior. The discussion focuses on how widespread pollution might be based on available evidence, not the next steps to limit pollution.
E
people are inclined to pollute
P disagrees with this and Q agrees, making this the point of disagreement. P explicitly states that people have a disposition not to pollute. Q claims that actions follow the path of least resistance, which is to pollute, thus implying that people tend to pollute.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 44 - Section 2 - Question 10
March 16, 2014Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 117 - Section 2 - Question 10
March 16, 2014Before their larvae hatch, each parental pair of Nicrophorus beetles buries the carcass of a small vertebrate nearby. For several days after the larvae hatch, both beetles feed their voracious larvae from the carcass, which is entirely consumed within a week. Since both parents help with feeding, larvae should benefit from both parents’ presence; however, removing one parent before the hatching results in larvae that grow both larger and heavier than they otherwise would be.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why do the larva grow larger and heavier when one parent is present, even though both parents help with feeding by bringing a food source to the larva before they hatch?
Objective
The correct answer should help explain why having one parent present present is better for the larva’s growth than having two parents. Perhaps, for example, having two parents takes away from the amount of food available to the larva, or causes some kind of biological reaction in the larva that inhibits their growth. Or perhaps there’s something about having one parent present that leads larva to eat more.
A
Two beetles can find and bury a larger carcass than can a single beetle.
This makes the discrepancy harder to explain, because it’s something positive about having two parents present compared to only one.
B
Both parents use the carcass as their own food supply for as long as they stay with the larvae.
If both parents use the carcass for their own food, that leave less food available for the larva when both parents are present compared to when only one is present. That could explain why the larva grow larger with only one present.
C
Beetle parents usually take turns feeding their larvae, so that there is always one provider available and one at rest.
This doesn’t tell us why having both parents present would lead to less food for the larva. If anything, it suggests having both present would help the larva feed, which makes the discrepancy harder to explain.
D
After a week, the larvae are capable of finding other sources of food and feeding themselves.
But why would having two parents around be worse for larva growth than having only one present? This doesn’t differentiate between having both parents around compared to only one.
E
Two parents can defend the carcass from attack by other insects better than a single parent can.
This is a reason to think larva should have more food available when both parents are present than when only one is present. This makes the discrepancy harder to explain.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 38 - Section 4 - Question 10
March 16, 2014Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 114 - Section 4 - Question 10
March 16, 2014
Summary
Technological progress is required for economic growth and widespread prosperity. Technological progress also causes a worker’s particular skills to be less crucial to production. A worker’s satisfaction depends on the belief that their work is difficult and requires uncommon skills.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Clearly, then, technological progress may cause worker satisfaction to decrease.
A
decreases the quality of most products
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know anything about the quality of products from the stimulus.
B
provides benefits only to those whose work is not directly affected by it
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus who, if anyone in particular, benefits from technological progress. We only know that it is required for economic growth and widespread prosperity.
C
is generally opposed by the workers whose work will be directly affected by it
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus whether workers support or oppose technological progress. They may nonetheless support it because it could make their jobs easier, less time consuming, and so forth.
D
causes workers to feel less satisfaction in their work
This answer is strongly supported. We know from the stimulus that worker satisfaction depends on workers believing that their work is difficult. Yet, technological progress causes a worker’s importance to decrease.
E
eliminates many workers’ jobs
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus whether any jobs would be eliminated. To say that a worker’s role becomes less crucial is not equivalent to saying the worker’s role would be eliminated.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 37 - Section 4 - Question 10
March 11, 2014Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 113 - Section 4 - Question 10
March 11, 2014Galina: It must be something other than sugar, because the concentration of sugar in the maple sap is so low that a squirrel would need to drink an enormous amount of sap to get any significant amount of sugar.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
Lydia concludes that red squirrels are probably after the sugar in sugar maple tree sap. To support her claim, Lydia reasons that water is easily available from other sources, so the squirrels would not chew holes into trees just to get water.
Describe Method of Reasoning
Lydia concludes a hypothesis for a phenomenon she has observed. She does this by eliminating alternative hypotheses. Lydia reasons that if sugar tree sap is essentially water with sugar, and water is easily available from other nearby sources, then the squirrels are probably after the sugar content of the sap.
A
dismissing potentially disconfirming data
Lydia does not dismiss any data from consideration. Lydia dismisses an alternative hypothesis for the phenomenon of red squirrels consuming sugar maple tree sap.
B
citing a general rule of which the conclusion is a specific instance
Lydia does not apply her hypothesis to a specific instance. Her argument is stated generally and theoretically.
C
presenting an observed action as part of a larger pattern of behavior
Lydia does not address a larger pattern of behavior. We cannot assume that since the squirrels chew holes into certain trees that this action is part of a larger pattern.
D
drawing an analogy between well-understood phenomena and an unexplained phenomenon
Lydia does not draw an analogy to support her claims.
E
rejecting a possible alternative explanation for an observed phenomenon
The observed phenomena is the squirrels chewing holes to consume tree sap. The alternative explanation Lydia rejects is the explanation that the squirrels are after the water content of the sap.