Questions Question 17

LSAT 31 - Section 2 - Question 17

June 18, 2015

1 comment

LSAT 113 - Section 3 - Question 17

June 18, 2015

1 comment

LSAT 30 - Section 2 - Question 17

June 18, 2015

12 comments

LSAT 111 - Section 3 - Question 17

June 18, 2015

Only a very small percentage of people from the service professions ever become board members of the 600 largest North American corporations. This shows that people from the service professions are underrepresented in the most important corporate boardrooms in North America.

Summarize Argument

The author concludes that people from the service professions are underrepresented in the most important corporate boardrooms in North America. She supports this by noting that only a small percentage of them become board members of the 600 largest corporations.

Identify and Describe Flaw

The author’s conclusion is about the amount of board members who are from service professions, while her premise is about the percentage of people from service professions who are board members.

She assumes that, because a small percentage of people from service professions are board members, it must be that a small percentage of board members are from service professions. But what if only 5% of people from service professions are board members, but 75% of board members are from service professions? Then people from the service professions would certainly not be underrepresented.

A

Six hundred is too small a sample on which to base so sweeping a conclusion about the representation of people from the service professions.

The author’s argument isn’t flawed due to sample size. 600 is simply referring to the number of the largest corporations in North America, and the conclusion is about these same “most important” corporations. She isn’t using an unrepresentative sample to draw her conclusion.

B

The percentage of people from the service professions who serve on the boards of the 600 largest North American corporations reveals little about the percentage of the members of these boards who are from the service professions.

Just because a small percentage of people from service professions are board members, does not mean that a small percentage of board members are from service professions. The author mistakenly assumes that it does.

C

It is a mistake to take the 600 largest North American corporations to be typical of corporate boardrooms generally.

The author doesn't make this mistake because she isn’t talking about corporate boardrooms generally. She’s just talking about “the most important corporate boardrooms in North America.”

D

It is irrelevant to smaller corporations whether the largest corporations in North America would agree to have significant numbers of workers from the service professions on the boards of the largest corporations.

How this impacts smaller corporations is irrelevant. The argument only addresses the largest corporations in North America.

E

The presence of people from the service professions on a corporate board does not necessarily imply that that corporation will be more socially responsible than it has been in the past.

The author never addresses corporations’ levels of social responsibility or how board members from service professions might impact social responsibility. (E) is irrelevant.

12 comments

LSAT 27 - Section 1 - Question 17

June 18, 2015

4 comments

LSAT 104 - Section 1 - Question 17

June 18, 2015

The stable functioning of a society depends upon the relatively long-term stability of the goals of its citizens. This is clear from the fact that unless the majority of individuals have a predictable and enduring set of aspirations, it will be impossible for a legislature to craft laws that will augment the satisfaction of the citizenry, and it should be obvious that a society is stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens.

Summarize Argument

The author claims that for a society to be stable, its citizens must have stable goals. This is a conditional claim, which is supported by chaining together two conditional premises. One premise is that a stable society necessitates laws that increase the happiness of its citizens. The other is that creating laws which increase citizens’ happiness requires most people to have “a predictable and enduring set of aspirations”, i.e. stable goals.
P1. stable society → laws increase happiness
P2. laws increase happiness → stable goals
Therefore, stable society → stable goals

Identify Argument Part

The claim that “a society is stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens” is one of the premises used to establish the conclusion.

A

It is the conclusion of the argument.

The claim about stability and laws that increase happiness is a premise used to reach the conclusion. It’s not supported by anything else, so can’t be a conclusion.

B

It helps to support the conclusion of the argument.

This correctly identifies that the claim about stability and laws that increase happiness is one of the author’s premises. It supports the conclusion, and has no other role in the argument.

C

It is a claim that must be refuted if the conclusion is to be established.

The argument doesn’t contain any claims that need to be refuted. The author takes both premises for granted, and they validly yield the conclusion. It’s that simple, no refutation involved.

D

It is a consequence of the argument.

The claim about stability and laws that increase happiness that increase happiness can’t be a consequence of anything because nothing else leads to it. It’s just stated without any support.

E

It is used to illustrate the general principle that the argument presupposes.

The claim about stability and laws that increase happiness doesn’t illustrate anything. It combines with another premise to lead to the conclusion, but not by providing an example.

4 comments

LSAT 74 - Section 4 - Question 17

January 10, 2015

15 comments

LSAT 142 - Section 4 - Question 17

January 10, 2015

Under the legal doctrine of jury nullification, a jury may legitimately acquit a defendant it believes violated a law if the jury believes that law to be unjust. Proponents argue that this practice is legitimate because it helps shield against injustice. But the doctrine relies excessively on jurors’ objectivity. When juries are empowered to acquit on grounds of their perceptions of unfairness, they too often make serious mistakes.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

The author implicitly concludes that proponents of jury nullification are wrong. He supports this by claiming that jury nullification depends too much on jurors’ objectivity and that juries too often make serious mistakes when deciding to acquit based on perceived unfairness.

Describe Method of Reasoning

The author undermines the proponents of jury nullification by pointing out that the doctrine has negative consequences— overreliance on jurors’ objectivity and a tendency for juries to make serious mistakes based on perceived unfairness.

A

attacking the motives of the proponents of the doctrine

The author never attacks the motives of the proponents of jury nullification. He just undermines their position by pointing out negative consequences of the doctrine.

B

identifying an inconsistency within the reasoning used to support the position

The author doesn’t point out any inconsistencies in the proponents’ reasoning. He just points out the consequences of their position.

C

attempting to show that a premise put forward in support of the position is false

The proponents’ premise is that jury nullification is legitimate “because it helps shield against injustice.” The author never argues that this is false, and we can’t presume that his argument implies that it’s false. Instead, he highlights negative consequences of the doctrine.

D

presenting a purported counterexample to a general claim made by the doctrine’s proponents

The author never presents a counterexample to the proponents’ claim. He just presents consequences of jury nullification.

E

arguing that the application of the doctrine has undesirable consequences

The author undermines the proponents’ conclusion by arguing that the application of the doctrine has undesirable consequences— overreliance on jurors’ objectivity and a tendency for juries to make serious mistakes based on perceived unfairness.

15 comments

LSAT 74 - Section 1 - Question 17

January 10, 2015

62 comments

LSAT 142 - Section 1 - Question 17

January 10, 2015

How the pigment known as Han purple was synthesized by the ancient Chinese of the Qin and Han dynasties has puzzled scientists. The Chinese chemists employed the same chemical ingredients used for Han purple in the production of a common type of white glass during that period. Both were produced in processes that involved subjecting the mixtures to high heat and mixing in lead to decrease the melting temperature. Thus, Han purple was probably discovered by fortuitous accident during glass production.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The author hypothesizes that Han purple was probably discovered by accident during the production of glass. This is based on the fact that the same chemical ingredients are used for Han purple and a common type of white glass that was made during the period Han purple was made. In addition, both Han purple and this white glass were made using processes that involved high heat and mixing in lead.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes there’s no more likely explanation for the origin of Han purple besides accidental discovery during the production of white glass.

A

Chemical analysis shows that most of the known fragments of both Han purple and the white glass were produced within a small geographical radius.

This strengthens by establishing at least that Han purple and white glass were produced near each other. If this were not true, the author’s hypothesis wouldn’t make sense. (A) isn’t a powerful strengthener, but it most strengthens compared to the other answers.

B

Han purple was used for luxury and ceremonial items, whereas the white glass was used to make certain household items.

The purposes of Han purple and white glass doesn’t reveal anything about how Han purple was discovered.

C

The technique used for producing Han purple was known to very few people during the Qin and Han dynasties.

This limits the number of people who knew how to make Han purple. But does this help show that Han purple was discovered during the production of white glass? We have no reason to think so.

D

The ingredients used in producing both Han purple and the white glass were easily obtainable during the Qin and Han dynasties.

How easy the ingredients were to obtain doesn’t shed any light on whether Han purple was discovered during the production of white glass.

E

The white glass is found in more surviving artifacts from the Qin and Han dynasties than Han purple is.

(E) suggests white glass might have been more widely used or more durable. But that doesn’t tell us anything about whether Han purple was discovered during the production of white glass.

66 comments