Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 118 - Section 4 - Question 10
February 28, 2014
Summarize Argument
The argument concludes that medieval societies were less concerned with money than modern ones. This is because monastic authors (monks) accepted disciplined religious lifestyles.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The problem is that this argument makes a claim about medieval societies in general despite only appealing to writings from monks. This group is especially likely to be unrepresentative because these are people who chose to live in monasteries, meaning that they were almost certainly more accepting of ascetic lifestyles than the rest of people in medieval society. In other words, the author is drawing from a biased sample of writings.
A
employs the imprecise term “ascetic”
The term “ascetic” just refers to a disciplined religious lifestyle, so there’s nothing imprecise about how the argument uses it.
B
generalizes from a sample that is likely to be unrepresentative
This points out the problem in using monks’ writings as support for the claim that medieval societies in general were less concerned with money. It’s highly likely that other members of medieval society were more concerned with money than monks were.
C
applies contemporary standards inappropriately to medieval societies
This would describe an argument that unfairly uses a modern standard to judge medieval people. The argument doesn’t do this; it draws a direct comparison between medieval and modern societies.
D
inserts personal opinions into what purports to be a factual debate
The author draws on written evidence, not personal opinions. The problem with the evidence is that it only tells us about monastic authors who likely don’t represent medieval society in general.
E
advances premises that are inconsistent
This would describe evidence that contradicts itself, but there’s nothing contradictory about referencing monastic writings about ascetic lifestyles.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 45 - Section 1 - Question 10
February 28, 2014Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 118 - Section 1 - Question 10
February 28, 2014James: People have always been critical of the art of their own time. They forget all but the greatest art from past eras. Since inferior contemporary artworks have not yet been forgotten, people today mistakenly think that contemporary art is generally inferior to earlier art.
Speaker 1 Summary
Rachel concludes that artists’ freedom from the constraints of their predecessors has caused a decline the quality of art. This is because great art requires that artists struggle against external constraints.
Speaker 2 Summary
James concludes that there hasn’t been a decline in the quality of art. People only think there’s been a decline, because people only remember the best artwork of the past, and have not get forgotten the inferior artwork of the present.
Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about whether art today is worse than the art of the past. Rachel thinks today’s art is worse. James thinks it’s not worse.
A
contemporary art is of lower quality than earlier art
This is a point of disagreement. Rachel thinks contemporary art is worse than the art of the past. James calls that belief a mistake.
B
contemporary artists are bound by the same constraints as their predecessors
James doesn’t express an opinion about this. He doesn’t discuss constraints or whether the artists of today have the same constraints as artists of the past.
C
great art is produced only when an artist struggles against limitations
James doesn’t express an opinion. He doesn’t discuss requirements for great art or the struggles of artists.
D
inferior art from past eras is generally forgotten
Rachel doesn’t express an opinion. She doesn’t discuss inferior art of the past and whether people remember it.
E
one can correctly assess the quality of art only if it was produced in past eras
The speakers share the same opinion about this. Both assess the quality of contemporary art. This suggests they both think that we can correctly assess the quality of modern art.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 41 - Section 3 - Question 10
February 25, 2014Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 124 - Section 2 - Question 10
February 25, 2014
Summary
The stimulus can be diagrammed as follows:
Notable Valid Inferences
Most speed readers have above-average intelligence.
A
Some people can speed-read, and are able to fully concentrate, but are of below-average intelligence.
This must be false. We know that all people who are able to fully concentrate are of above-average intelligence.
B
All people who can speed-read are of above-average intelligence.
This could be true. We know for sure that most speed readers are of above-average intelligence; it could still be true that all are of above average intelligence.
C
Many people of above-average intelligence are unable to fully concentrate.
This could be true. We know that all people who can fully concentrate are of above-average intelligence, but this doesn’t mean that everyone of above-average intelligence can fully concentrate.
D
Some people with little ability to concentrate are of below-average intelligence, but can speed-read.
This could be true. If someone of is below-average intelligence, then they can’t fully concentrate. It could totally be the case that this person has the ability to speed read.
E
All people who can speed-read are able to concentrate to some extent.
This could be true. The only factor related to concentration discussed in the stimulus is “full concentration;” it could be the case that all people who can speed read can concentrate at least a little bit.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 41 - Section 1 - Question 10
February 25, 2014Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 1 - Question 10
February 25, 2014Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 40 - Section 3 - Question 10
February 21, 2014Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 120 - Section 4 - Question 10
February 21, 2014
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The researcher concludes that whenever a child exhibits a learning deficit, the hippocampus is malfunctioning. Why? Because, if memory fails to work correctly, it leads to a learning deficit. And all short-term memory failures are caused by hippocampus malfunctions.
Identify and Describe Flaw
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of confusing sufficiency and necessity. The author implicitly argues that hippocampus memory malfunctions always lead to learning deficits. Therefore, learning deficits are always the result of hippocampus malfunctions.
The problem is that we don’t know that—there could be learning deficits that are the result of factors other than hippocampus malfunctions.
The problem is that we don’t know that—there could be learning deficits that are the result of factors other than hippocampus malfunctions.
A
draws a general conclusion based on too small a sample of learning deficits
We have no indication that the researcher’s sample size of learning deficits is insufficient.
B
presumes, without giving justification, that all learning deficits in children involve short-term memory
The author has to presume this: if he doesn’t, there could be learning deficits not caused by memory problems, and therefore not necessarily caused by hippocampus malfunctions.
C
presumes, without giving justification, that short-term memory is disabled whenever the hippocampus is disabled
This is the reverse of what the author presumes. Namely, he thinks that the hippocampus is disabled whenever short-term memory is disabled.
D
fails to quantify precisely the length of time during which the mind holds a piece of information in short-term memory
The precise length of time is irrelevant; all the author needs to establish for his argument is that the length of time is limited.
E
takes for granted that learning deficits in adults have a cause unrelated to the cause of learning deficits in children
The author doesn’t presume this—learning deficits in adults aren’t mentioned here—so it can’t be the flaw.