Questions Question 17

LSAT 79 - Section 1 - Question 17

January 5, 2017

LSAT 147 - Section 1 - Question 17

January 5, 2017

Politician: Over the next decade, our city will be replacing all of its street signs with signs that are designed for improved readability. But since no one is complaining about the current signs, installing the new ones is a colossal waste of time and money.

Summarize Argument

The politician concludes that installing new signs is a colossal waste of time and money. This is because no one is complaining about the current signs.

Notable Assumptions

The politician assumes that replacing the current signs is only justified if people have complained about those signs. This means the politician doesn’t believe there’s any other good reason—specifically a reason that doesn’t have to do with public opinion—to replace the signs.

A

What features of the new street signs improve the readability of the signs?

We don’t care what specific features of the new signs improve readability. We need to know whether they’re a colossal waste of money since no one is complaining about the current signs.

B

Are the new street signs considerably more expensive to manufacture than the current street signs were?

We’re not comparing the relative cost of the signs. We care about whether replacing the current signs constitutes a colossal waste of money, which we have no reason to believe has anything to do with how much the signs originally cost to manufacture.

C

What percentage of its street signs does the city replace annually in the course of ordinary maintenance?

If the city replaces many signs throughout the year in the course ordinary maintenance, then the city may actually be saving money by commissioning the signs to be replaced in a single project. If not, then the city seems to just be replacing well-functioning signs.

D

Do any other cities plan to replace their street signs with signs designed for improved readability?

We’re not interested in other cities. Perhaps their signs were recently replaced, or else don’t need to be replaced for the same reason the city in question is choosing to replace its signs.

E

Were experts consulted when the new street signs were designed?

Irrelevant. Even if experts were consulted, we have no idea what their verdict was on replacing the signs.

34 comments

LSAT 78 - Section 3 - Question 17

August 12, 2016

9 comments

LSAT 146 - Section 3 - Question 17

August 12, 2016

Photographs show an area of Europa, a moon of Jupiter, where the icy surface appears to have buckled as a result of turbulent water moving underneath. This photographic evidence indicates that there is a warm sea beneath Europa’s icy surface. The presence of such a sea is thought by scientists to be a primary factor in the early development of life, so there is reason to believe that there may be life on Europa.

Summarize Argument

The author concludes that there is reason to believe that there may be life on Europa. As support for this conclusion, the author cites photographs that show that the icy surface of the moon seems to have buckled because of turbulent water underneath the surface. The author claims that this buckled ice is evidence that there is a warm sea underneath Europa’s icy surface. Scientists believe that a warm sea is a factor in the development of life, so the presence of a warm sea would support the author’s conclusion that there may be life on Europa.

Identify Argument Part

The claim in the question stem is an intermediate conclusion. It receives support from the observation that the icy surface seems to have buckled. This claim then provides support for the main conclusion that there may be life on Europa.

A

It is a subsidiary conclusion used by the argument to support its overall conclusion.

The claim in the question stem is a subsidiary conclusion because it receives support from the observation that the icy surface seems to have buckled, and it goes on to support the argument’s main conclusion that there may be life on Europa.

B

It is the overall conclusion of the argument.

The overall conclusion of the argument is that there may be life on Europa, not that there is a warm sea beneath Europa’s icy surface.

C

It is used to discredit a theory that the argument disputes.

The argument does not discuss a theory that it disputes. The argument just works to support the claim that there may be life on Europa.

D

It is the only consideration presented in support of the argument’s overall conclusion.

It is not the only consideration used to support the main conclusion; there is additional evidence offered (for example, that such warm seas are thought to be a primary factor in the development of life).

E

It is presented as support for a subsidiary conclusion drawn in the argument.

The claim in the question stem is the subsidiary conclusion, it is not used to support the subsidiary conclusion.

9 comments

LSAT 78 - Section 1 - Question 17

August 12, 2016

46 comments

LSAT 146 - Section 1 - Question 17

August 12, 2016

In order to relieve traffic congestion, the city of Gastner built a new highway linking several of the city’s suburbs to the downtown area. However, the average commute time for workers in downtown Gastner increased after the new highway opened.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Why did the average commute time for workers in downtown Gastner increase after the new highway, which linked several suburbs to downtown and was built to relieve traffic congestion, opened?

Objective

The correct answer will be a hypothesis that explains a key difference in traffic patterns before and after the new highway opened. This difference must result in an increased commute time for downtown workers, either because of an overall increase in drivers to downtown Gastner, or because of some traffic shift caused by the new highway.

A

Most people who work in the downtown area of Gastner commute from one of the city’s suburbs.

If most downtown workers commute from the suburbs and the new highway links the suburbs to downtown, shouldn’t most downtown workers’ commute time have decreased? (A) doesn’t help to explain why the average commute time actually increased after the highway opened.

B

The location of the new highway is most convenient for people who commute to and from Gastner’s largest suburbs.

The highway’s convenience for people from the largest suburbs doesn’t explain why the average commute time for downtown workers increased after the highway opened. We need an answer choice that explains how traffic patterns in Gastner changed because of the new highway.

C

Shortly after the new highway was opened, several suburban roads connecting to the new highway were upgraded with new stoplights.

We don't know if new stoplights on suburban roads would increase commute times. Maybe all the suburban roads previously had stop signs, which are generally much slower than stoplights. We still need an explanation for why workers' commute times increased after the highway opened.

D

At the same time the new highway was being built, road repair work was being done on important streets leading to downtown Gastner.

We need an explanation for why workers’ commute times increased after the highway opened, not while the highway was being built.

E

In Gastner’s downtown area, traffic on the roads near the new highway became more congested after the new highway was opened.

This explains a key difference in downtown traffic patterns before and after the new highway opened that caused workers’ commute times to increase. Because of the new highway, traffic on downtown roads near the highway became more congested, which led to increased commute times.

50 comments

LSAT C2 - Section 3 - Question 17

June 15, 2016

12 comments

LSAT 128 - Section 3 - Question 17

June 15, 2016

12 comments

LSAT C2 - Section 2 - Question 17

June 15, 2016

29 comments

LSAT 128 - Section 2 - Question 17

June 15, 2016

Archaeologists excavating a Neanderthal campsite found discarded gazelle teeth there whose coloration indicated that gazelles had been hunted throughout the year. The archaeologists concluded that the Neanderthals had inhabited the campsite year-round and thus were not nomadic. In contrast, the archaeologists cite a neighboring campsite of nomadic Cro-Magnons that contained teeth from gazelles all killed during the same season.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The author hypothesizes that the Neanderthals who had used a particular campsite had inhabited the campsite year-round and were not nomadic. This is based on the the fact that discarded gazelle teeth at the campsite showed that the gazelles were hunted throughout the year. This was unlike what was found in a nearby campsite of a nomadic Cro-Magnon group, which contained teeth from gazelles killed only during a single season.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes that the only explanation for the presence of discarded gazelle teeth from gazelles hunted throughout the year is that the Neanderthals lived at the campsite all year.

A

Neanderthals hunted a wide variety of both migratory and nonmigratory animals.

If (A) does anything, it might support the theory that the Neanderthals stayed at the campsite by showing that Neanderthals did not need to follow a migratory animals around for food.

B

Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals sometimes exchanged tools.

An exchange of tools has no clear relationship to whether Neanderthals were nomadic or stayed in the same place. Perhaps the exchange of tools happened when the Cro-Magnons happened to be in the area around the Neanderthals.

C

Neanderthals saved gazelle teeth for use in religious rituals and later discarded them.

This provides another explanation for the presence of discarded gazelle teeth that showed gazelles were hunted throughout the year. The Neanderthals may have moved around, hunted gazelles as they moved, and then dumped the teeth they collected at one campsite.

D

Cro-Magnons usually followed the migrations of the animals they hunted.

This suggests that Cro-Magnons were nomadic. But Neanderthals are a different group and we have reason to think Neanderthals behaved differently from Cro-Magnons (the difference in gazelle teeth at each campsite).

E

Gazelles inhabited the area around the campsites year-round.

This supports the author’s theory by showing that Neanderthals could have stayed at the site year-round and hunted gazelles year-round. This eliminates the possibility that gazelles were in the area for only a short time each year.

42 comments