LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 10

January 19, 2014

9 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 11

January 19, 2014

32 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 12

January 19, 2014

Consumer advocate: Even if one can of fruit or vegetables weighs more than another, the heavier can does not necessarily contain more food. Canned fruits and vegetables are typically packed in water, which can make up more than half the total weight of the can’s contents. And nothing stops unscrupulous canning companies from including more water per can than others include.

Summarize Argument
Heavier cans of fruit or vegetables from different companies may not actually contain more food. Some cans might have less food despite being heavier because the fruits and vegetables are packed in water, which can make up more than half the weight. Since some canning companies might add more water than others, heavier cans might not contain more food.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the consumer advocate’s warning that heavier cans of fruit or vegetables may not actually contain more food.

A
The heavier of two cans of fruit or vegetables does not necessarily contain more food than the lighter of the two cans contains.
This accurately states the consumer advocate's main conclusion. Since packing companies can add more water to their cans, a heavier can of fruit or vegetables doesn’t always have more food than a lighter one. The heavier can might just have much more water than the lighter can.
B
The weight of the water in a can of fruit or vegetables can be more than half the total weight of the can’s contents.
This is a premise. The statement that water can make up more than half the weight of a can of fruit or vegetables helps readers understand the consumer advocate's conclusion that heavier cans don't always contain more food—they might just have more water.
C
Nothing stops unscrupulous canning companies from including more water per can than others include.
This is a premise. The claim that "nothing stops unscrupulous canning companies from including more water per can" supports the consumer advocate's conclusion that heavier cans do not always contain more food. The extra weight could just be from more water, not more food.
D
Some canning companies include less food in cans of a given weight than others include.
This is a necessary assumption of the consumer advocate’s argument. The advocate assumes that some canning companies might add more water and, therefore, less food to their cans. If this assumption is true, then a heavier can could have less food than another can of the same weight.
E
The heavier of two cans of fruits or vegetables may include more water than the lighter of the two cans contains.
This is a necessary assumption of the consumer advocate’s argument. The argument relies on the assumption that a heavier can may include more water—and therefore less food—than a lighter can. If this is true, then a heavier can doesn’t necessarily contain more food.

1 comment

LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 13

January 19, 2014

Several three-year-olds who had learned to count to ten were trying to learn their telephone numbers. Although each child was familiar with the names of all the digits, no child could remember his or her phone number. Their teacher then taught each child a song whose lyrics contained his or her phone number. By the end of the day the children could remember their telephone numbers.

Summary
A group of 3-year-olds who new the numbers 1 through 10 were trying to learn their phone numbers. Initially no child could remember his or her number. But after a teacher taught each child a song that contained his or her phone number, the children could remember the phone number.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
The song the teacher taught probably helped each child remember his or her number.
A string of numbers might be easier to remember if they are part of a song.

A
There are some things that children cannot learn without the aid of songs.
Unsupported. Although the song likely helped the children remember their numbers, that doesn’t mean the song was required in order for them to remember. Maybe the children also could have remembered the numbers through a special game or special cartoon.
B
Familiarity with a concept is not always sufficient for knowing the words used to express it.
Unsupported. The children knew the numbers 1 through 10. There’s no evidence that they didn’t know the words to express these numbers. They had trouble remembering a specific string of numbers; not with the words that express those numbers.
C
Mnemonic devices such as songs are better than any other method for memorizing numbers.
Unsupported. The song likely helped them remember their phone numbers. But we don’t get a comparison to other memory methods. Maybe seeing the number in a special cartoon would have been more effective.
D
Children can learn to count without understanding the meaning of numbers.
Unsupported. Failing to remember a string of numbers does not imply inability to understand the meaning of numbers. We don’t have any evidence the children didn’t understand the meaning of “three.” They just had trouble remembering the order of several numbers put together.
E
Songs are useful in helping children remember the order in which familiar words occur.
Strongly supported. Children were familiar with individual numbers, but had trouble remembering a string of numbers. They were able to remember the string after learning a song containing that string of numbers. Doesn’t guarantee causation, but it is evidence the song helped.

11 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 14

January 19, 2014

15 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 15

January 19, 2014

13 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 16

January 19, 2014

13 comments

LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 17

January 19, 2014

Science teacher: In any nation, a flourishing national scientific community is essential to a successful economy. For such a community to flourish requires that many young people become excited enough about science that they resolve to become professional scientists. Good communication between scientists and the public is necessary to spark that excitement.

Summary

If a nation has a successful economy, it must have a flourishing national scientific community. If the nation has a flourishing national community, it needs to have many young people who are excited enough about science to want to become scientists. If this excitement exists, there must be good communication between scientists and the public.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

Successful economy -> flourishing scientific community -> young people excited - > good communication between scientists and the public.

You can make any valid inference along this chain.

A
If scientists communicate with the public, many young people will become excited enough about science to resolve to become professional scientists.

Scientists communicating with the public is not a sufficient condition that can trigger any valid inferences. If you got this wrong, practice conditional indicators, mapping, and following lawgic chains.

B
The extent to which a national scientific community flourishes depends principally on the number of young people who become excited enough about science to resolve to become professional scientists.

While young people's excitement about science is necessary for a national scientific community to flourish, there is no evidence that *the number* of these students is principally important.

C
No nation can have a successful economy unless at some point scientists have communicated well with the public.

This is supported because it is a valid inference on the formal logic chain (Successful economy -> good communication). If you struggled to map this, practice mapping with two conditional indicators.

D
It is essential to any nation’s economy that most of the young people in that nation who are excited about science become professional scientists.

This is too strong to support. The stimulus only says that many young people need to be excited about science, not “most.”

E
An essential component of success in any scientific endeavor is good communication between the scientists involved in that endeavor and the public.

This is not supported because the stimulus never gives conditions for the success of any scientific endeavor.


12 comments

LSAT 71 - Section 3 - Question 01

January 19, 2014

1 comment

LSAT 71 - Section 3 - Question 02

January 19, 2014

2 comments

«‹131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151›»