Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 01
April 21, 2012Gustav: Carver was one of the finest writers of the past 30 years. Granted, his stories are characterized by somberness and pessimism, but they are also wryly humorous, compassionate, and beautifully structured.
Speaker 1 Summary
Carver’s stories are inferiorly written. Why? Because his stories are somber and pessimistic.
Speaker 2 Summary
Carver was one of the best writers of the past 30 years. Why? Because despite the somberness and pessimism, his stories are humorous, compassionate, and beautifully structured.
Objective
We need a statement that Ilana and Gustav disagree on. They disagree that a well-written story can be somber and pessimistic. Ilana thinks that these characteristics are indicative of inferior writing. Gustav thinks that despite these characteristics, Carver was a great writer.
A
Carver’s stories are truly compassionate
Ilana does not express an opinion on this statement. We only know that Ilana thinks Carver’s stories are somber and pessimistic.
B
Carver’s stories are pessimistic in their vision
Both speakers agree on this statement. Ilana thinks that Carver’s stories are somber and pessimistic. Gustav concedes that Carver’s stories have these characteristics.
C
stories that are characterized by somberness and pessimism can appropriately be called humorous
Ilana does not express an opinion on this statement. We only know that Ilana thinks Carver’s stories are somber and pessimistic.
D
stories that are well written can be somber and pessimistic
Ilana and Gustav disagree on this statement. Ilana disagrees because she thinks Carver’s stories are written poorly due to the fact that the stories are somber and pessimistic. Gustav agrees because he thinks despite these characteristics, Carver is a great writer.
E
there are some characteristics of a story that are decisive in determining its aesthetic value
Neither speaker expresses an opinion on this statement. We don’t know whether Ilana or Gustav think that Carver’s stories have aesthetic value.
</section
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 02
April 21, 2012
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why did public anxiety about violent crime greatly increase over the course of the last year when during the same time there was the greatest drop in violent crime over the course of a year since such statistics were first gathered?
Objective
The right answer will be a hypothesis that explains a disconnect between the amount of violent crime that was committed last year and peoples’ knowledge or perceptions of violent crime over the course of last year.
A
Longer prison sentences were the primary cause of the decrease in the violent crime rate over the course of last year.
We aren’t worried about why violent crime dropped last year. We want to know why people became more anxious about violent crime last year while violent crime was dropping.
B
As in the past, last year’s increase in public anxiety about violent crime has been consistently underreported in the news media.
The amount that the media has reported anxiety about violent crime is irrelevant. (B) doesn’t help explain why people became increasingly anxious about violent crime over the course of last year.
C
Most people can realistically assess the likelihood that they will become victims of violent crime.
Knowing that people can accurately assess their likelihood of being a victim of violent crime does nothing to explain why the public’s anxiety about violent crime increased last year while violent crime was dropping.
D
People who feel the most anxiety about violent crime usually live in areas with relatively high violent crime rates.
It doesn’t matter which people tend to be the most anxious about violent crime. We want to know why people, in the aggregate, were becoming increasingly anxious about violent crime last year while the violent crime rate was dropping.
E
The proportion of violent crimes covered in the news media nearly doubled over the course of last year.
This gives a possible explanation for people becoming more anxious about violent crime last year while violent crime was dropping. The increased coverage of violent crimes may have increased the public’s anxiety about violent crime even though violent crime was decreasing.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 03
April 21, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 04
April 21, 2012Cookie Cutter Review
Causation
(A) related effect
(C) control group
(D) consistent data
(E) related cause
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The psychologist hypothesizes that violent video games lead kids to think aggressive behavior is okay. This is demonstrated by the phenomenon that, immediately after playing violent video games, kids show more aggressive behavior than they did before playing the game.
Notable Assumptions
The psychologist assumes that it is the violence in the games that leads children to act aggressively, as opposed to some other factor in the video games (e.g., maybe video games in general lead to increased aggression). Additionally, the author assumes that because children behave aggressively after playing the games, they believe such behavior is acceptable.
A
Young children tend to be more accepting of aggressive behavior in others immediately after playing video games with violent content.
This strengthens the argument. Children being more accepting of other people’s aggression after playing violent video games strengthens the conclusion that violent video games lead children to believe violent behavior is acceptable.
B
Many young children who have never played video games with violent content believe that aggressive behavior is acceptable.
This does not affect the argument. The psychologist does not argue that violent video games are the only thing that makes kids believe aggressive behavior is okay—it could be one of many factors.
C
Other studies have shown no increase in aggressive behavior in young children who have just played nonviolent video games.
This strengthens the argument by supporting the assumption that it is violent video games—as opposed to video games in general—which cause aggressive behavior.
D
Older children are less likely before playing video games with violent content than they are afterwards to believe that aggressive behavior is acceptable.
This strengthens the argument by suggesting that the psychologist’s conclusion applies to older children as well as young children—the phenomenon described by the psychologist is seen elsewhere as well.
E
Young children tend to behave more aggressively immediately after being told that aggressive behavior is acceptable than they did beforehand.
This strengthens the argument by reinforcing the psychologist’s assumption that violent video games teach children that aggressive behavior is acceptable.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 05
April 21, 2012
A
criticizes a characteristic of the people giving an argument rather than criticizing the argument itself
The author attacks the lifestyle of celebrities and movie stars who often criticize middle-class families, rather than addressing their criticism of middle-class families itself. He never actually provides any evidence for why that criticism should not be taken too seriously.
B
takes failure to act consistently with a belief as an indication of the sincerity with which that belief is held
The author never argues that the celebrities and movie stars do not sincerely hold the belief that middle-class families should be criticized for their lifestyles. Even if he did, (B) wouldn’t describe a flaw in his argument.
C
presumes that a viewpoint must be unreasonable to accept simply because some of the grounds advanced to support it do not adequately do so
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of confusing a lack of support for a conclusion with proof that the conclusion is false. The author doesn’t make this mistake; he never addresses or attacks any support for the celebrities’ criticism.
D
fails to recognize that evidence advanced in support of a conclusion actually undermines that conclusion
The author never provides any real evidence in support of his conclusion. The claim that celebrities’ lifestyles are environmentally damaging doesn’t support his conclusion, but it also doesn't undermine it.
E
generalizes about the behavior of all people on the basis of the behavior of a few
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of hasty generalization. The author doesn't make this mistake. He doesn’t generalize about the behavior of all people, he just claims that the criticism against middle-class families shouldn’t be taken too seriously.
Cookie Cutter Review
Flaw - source or character attack (A)
(B) conflation of distinct ideas
(C) failure to prove X confused with proof of not X
(D) evidence against X confused with evidence for X
(E) too small sample size / over-generalization
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 06
April 21, 2012
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that cattle egrets follows herds of cattle because the cattle herds’ grazing process offers the egrets with convenient access to insects. This is based on the phenomenon that cattle egrets live around herds of cattle.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes there is no other explanation for why cattle egrets live around herds of cattle.
A
Birds other than cattle egrets have been observed consuming insects stirred up by the movement of cattle.
This strengthens the argument. It shows that a number of bird species benefit in the same way from herds of cattle, strengthening the argument that this benefit is why cattle egrets live around herds of cattle.
B
Cattle egrets are known to follow other slow-moving animals, such as rhinoceroses and buffalo.
This does not affect the argument. Cattle egrets following other slow-moving animals does not make the author’s explanation for why they follow herds of cattle any less convincing. For all we know, buffalo and rhinoceroses also stir up insects that the birds consume.
C
The presence of cattle dissuades many would-be predators of the cattle egret.
This weakens the argument by offering an alternative explanation for the phenomenon. If living near cattle provides protection from potential predators, the egrets gain a significant safety benefit from their proximity to the herds.
D
Cattle egrets are not generally known to live outside the range of large, slow-moving animals.
This does not affect the argument. Cattle egrets’ propensity for living near slow-moving animals does nothing to weaken the author’s explanation for why they live around herds of cattle.
E
Forests are generally inhospitable to cattle egrets because of a lack of insects of the kind egrets can consume.
This does not affect the argument. The fact that forests are inhospitable to cattle egrets does not challenge the author’s explanation for why these birds live around herds of cattle.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 07
April 21, 2012
Summary
The author concludes that any fruit that was inspected is safe to eat.
This is supported by the claim that any fruit that was inspected is not infected. (This is a translation of “No fruit that was inspected is infected.”)
The claim “any fruit that is infected is also rotten” plays no role in supporting the conclusion, because it doesn’t connect to the concept of “inspected” or “safe to eat.”
This is supported by the claim that any fruit that was inspected is not infected. (This is a translation of “No fruit that was inspected is infected.”)
The claim “any fruit that is infected is also rotten” plays no role in supporting the conclusion, because it doesn’t connect to the concept of “inspected” or “safe to eat.”
Missing Connection
We know from the premise that fruits that were inspected are not infected. But does this imply that those fruits are safe to eat? We don’t have anything that establishes what’s safe to eat.
We want to establish that if a fruit is not infected, then it’s safe to eat.
We want to establish that if a fruit is not infected, then it’s safe to eat.
A
It is not safe to eat any fruit that is rotten.
This establishes that if a fruit is rotten, it’s not safe to eat. But we want to establish what kind of fruit IS safe to eat. An answer establishing that something is NOT safe to eat does not prove that something IS safe to eat. Also, we don’t know whether fruits that are inspected are or are not rotten. So “rotten” doesn’t connect to anything relevant to the conclusion.
B
It is safe to eat any fruit that is not rotten.
We don’t know whether fruits that are inspected are or are not rotten. So (B) doesn’t help establish that fruits that are inspected are safe to eat. You might have mistakenly thought that fruits that are not infected are not rotten — but none of the premises establishes this relationship.
C
It would have been safe to eat infected fruit if it had been inspected.
The conclusion concerns fruits that were inspected and that are not infected. What would be true about infected fruits had they been inspected doesn’t affect fruits that were in fact inspected.
D
It is not safe to eat any fruit that is infected.
We want to establish what kind of fruit IS safe to eat. An answer establishing that something is NOT safe to eat does not prove that something IS safe to eat. (D) leaves open the possibility that it might still be unsafe to eat fruits that are uninfected; those fruits might be unsafe to eat for other reasons unrelated to infection.
E
It is safe to eat any fruit that is uninfected.
(E) establishes that if a fruit is uninfected, it is safe to eat. Since we know that fruits that are inspected are not infected, (E) proves that fruits that are inspected are safe to eat.
Cookie Cutter Review
SA question, heavy use of lawgic, formulaic
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 08
April 21, 2012
Summarize Argument
The price of pay phone calls should be allowed to increase. This is because twenty years ago they were the same price as a soft drink, and today, the price of a soft drink has more than doubled while the price of a pay phone call has remain unchanged.
Notable Assumptions
The author of the editorial assumes that the price increase of soda is not a necessary response to market conditions that local pay phone calls do not encounter (i.e., if the cost to produce soda increased, the price had to rise accordingly).
A
A pay phone typically cost less than a soft-drink machine in the 1970s.
This does not affect the argument. Regardless of the cost to purchase a pay phone or a soft-drink machine in the 1970s, the services and goods offered by these machines were priced the same.
B
Due to inflation, the prices of most goods more than doubled between the 1970s and 1990.
This does not affect the argument. We don’t know if soft drinks are among the goods whose prices increased due to inflation, or if the increase was caused by something else. It is possible that (B) does not even apply to soft drinks.
C
Government regulation of phone call prices did not become more stringent between the 1970s and 1990.
This does not affect the argument. Whether government regulation did or did not become more stringent during this period does not weaken the author’s conclusion that at the time of writing, the price of pay phone calls should be allowed to increase.
D
Between the 1970s and 1990 the cost of ingredients for soft drinks increased at a greater rate than the cost of telephone equipment.
This weakens the argument. It attacks the assumption that the increase in the price of soft drinks is not due to a market condition that pay phone calls do not also face. In other words, it costs more to produce a soft drink, but not to service a phone call.
E
Technological advances made telephone equipment more sophisticated between the 1970s and 1990.
This does not affect the argument. The increased sophistication of telephone equipment does not tell us about the cost to service or price to make a phone call.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 09
April 21, 2012Members of large-animal species must consume enormous amounts of food to survive. When climatic conditions in their environment deteriorate, such animals are often unable to find enough food. This fact helps make large-animal species more vulnerable to extinction than small-animal species, which can maintain greater populations on smaller amounts of food.
Summary
Large-animal species must consume enormous amounts of food. If climatic conditions deteriorate in their environment, these animals often cannot find enough food. This means that large-animal species are more vulnerable to extinction than small-animal species.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
A lack of food is one of the risk factors involved in mass extinctions. Climate changes can risk mass extinctions by undermining the food supply of large-animal species.
A
The maximum population size that an animal species could maintain on any given amount of food is the main factor determining whether that species will become extinct.
This is unsupported because we don’t know anything about the maximum population sizes that species maintain and how that relates to survival.
B
The vulnerability of an animal species to extinction depends at least in part on how much food individuals of that species must consume to survive.
This is strongly supported because different species, varying based on how much food they need, would have different risks of mass extinction. Large species who need more food are at a greater risk than small species needing less.
C
When conditions deteriorate in a given environment, no small-animal species will become extinct unless some large-animal species also becomes extinct.
This is unsupported because small-animal species may go extinct when conditions deteriorate due to reasons unrelated to food supply. The author only states that large-animal species are more from climate shocks to food.
D
Within any given species, the prospects for survival of any particular individual depend primarily on the amount of food that individual requires.
This is unsupported because while food is identified as one of the factors influencing prospects for survival, we don’t know that it is the primary factor. We also don’t know that it is the primary factor for any individual - our author limits analysis to whole species.
E
Whenever climatic conditions in a given environment are bad enough to threaten large-animal species with extinction, small-animal species are able to find enough food to survive.
This is unsupported because it is possible that climatic conditions are so bad as to affect small and large-species animals. We only know that large-species animals typically fare worse in climate changes.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 122 - Section 2 - Question 10
April 21, 2012Channen: Not everybody thinks that way. After all, money is the universal medium of exchange. So, if you have enough of it, you can exchange it for whatever other material goods you may need or want even if you are indifferent to what others think of you.
Speaker 1 Summary
Megan doesn’t make an argument, instead just stating a claim that once people’s basic needs are met, they only pursue additional wealth in order to increase their status or prestige.
Speaker 2 Summary
Channen argues that not everyone thinks about wealth in the way Megan describes. To show this, Channen points out that money is the universal medium of exchange. This means that even someone who doesn’t care about status or prestige might want more money in order to buy material goods. This acts as a hypothetical counter-example to Megan’s claim.
Objective
We need to find a point of disagreement. Megan and Channen disagree about the reasons people might have for pursuing wealth after their basic needs are met. Megan thinks the only reason is status and prestige, but Channen thinks there are other possibilities.
A
people ever pursue wealth beyond what is required for their basic needs
Both speakers agree that people can pursue wealth beyond what is required for their basic needs. Their disagreement is just about what would motivate someone to do so.
B
it is irrational to try to achieve high status or prestige in the eyes of one’s society
Like (C) and (D), neither speaker discusses rationality at all. The argument between Megan and Channen is about what people’s motivations are, not whether those motivations are rational.
C
the pursuit of monetary wealth is irrational only when it has no further purpose
Like (B) and (D), neither Megan nor Channen says anything about rationality or irrationality. What’s at question here is why people would seek wealth past a certain point, not whether the reasons for doing so are rational.
D
it is rational to maximize one’s ability to purchase whatever one wants only when the motive for doing so is something other than the desire for prestige
Like (B) and (C), rationality is never brought up by either speaker. The question of whether seeking additional wealth is rational is simply outside the scope of Megan and Channen’s discussion.
E
the motive for pursuing wealth beyond what one’s basic needs require is ever anything other than the desire for prestige or high status
Megan disagrees with this: her only claim is that this statement is not true. Channen, however, agrees and offers a hypothetical example to support this idea. This is the point of disagreement.