Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 4 - Question 24
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 4 - Question 25
August 17, 2012
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that insufficient consumption of fiber causes colon cancer, and sufficient consumption of fiber prevents it. This is based on the fact that numerous studies show a negative correlation between high-fiber diets and colon cancer.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the reason there’s a negative correlation between high-fiber diets and colon cancer is that high-fiber prevents colon cancer. This overlooks alternate explanations for the correlation. For example, there might be something else that is associated with high-fiber diets that helps prevent colon cancer. Or perhaps having colon cancer causes one to reduce one’s fiber intake.
A
the consumption of fiber in many countries is rising appreciably
This possibility doesn’t undermine the argument, because we have no idea whether colon cancer rates are increasing or decreasing in these countries.
B
the risk of many types of cancer is reduced by high-fiber diets
If anything, this might strengthen the argument by establishing a stronger connection between high-fiber diets and cancer reduction.
C
fiber is difficult for many people to include in their diets
The difficulty of including fiber in a diet has no bearing on whether the negative correlation between high-fiber and colon cancer is due to high-fiber preventing colon cancer.
D
the fiber in fruits and vegetables and the fiber in cereals have cancer-fighting properties to different degrees
The author never assumed that fiber in fruits/veggies and fiber in cereals had the exact same level of cancer-fighting properties. There can be differences; this doesn’t undermine the author’s reasoning.
E
foods containing fiber also contain other substances that, when consumed, tend to prevent colon cancer
This possibility, if true, shows that the negative correlation between high-fiber and colon cancer might be explained by the other substances in foods that contain fiber. It could be these other substances that reduce colon cancer, and not the fiber.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 4 - Question 26
August 17, 2012
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Chimpanzees do not necessarily have human-like language because, contrary to popular belief, humans did not evolve directly from chimpanzees. Instead, both species evolved from a common ancestor. As a result, the development of language in humans could have occurred after the extinction of this common ancestor, which means chimpanzees would not have developed the same language as humans.
Identify Conclusion
Chimpanzees may not have a human-like language.
A
Humans did not evolve from chimpanzees, but rather from some extinct species.
This statement is a premise that counters the misconception that humans evolved from chimpanzees. It supports the author’s argument that because humans and chimpanzees did not evolve directly from one another, chimpanzees do not necessarily have human-like language.
B
The assumption that something like human language must exist in some species from which humans evolved has no clearcut linguistic implications for chimpanzees.
This correctly states the conclusion: people assume that species from which humans evolved have human-like language, but this assumption doesn’t apply to chimpanzees since humans didn’t evolve from them. Thus, this assumption doesn’t tell us anything about chimpanzees’ language.
C
The communicative systems of chimpanzees are cruder than human language.
The stimulus does not make this claim. The anthropologist argues that chimpanzees do not necessarily have human-like language but doesn’t describe their language or compare it to human language. Since this claim is not made, it cannot be the main conclusion.
D
Human language is a by-product of human intelligence, which chimpanzees lack.
The stimulus doesn’t make this claim. The anthropologist argues that chimpanzees don’t necessarily have human-like language because humans didn’t evolve from chimpanzees, not because chimpanzees lack human intelligence. As this claim isn’t made, it can’t be the main conclusion.
E
The evolution of human language began after the disappearance of an extinct species from which both humans and chimpanzees evolved.
The stimulus does not make this claim. The anthropologist suggests that human language might have developed after the extinction of a common ancestor but does not assert this as a certainty. Additionally, this idea is part of the argument’s premise, not its main conclusion.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 19
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 20
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 21
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 22
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 23
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 4 - Question 19
August 17, 2012Editor Z: It’s very pretty, but it’s a bad photograph. It doesn’t make a statement; there’s no obvious reason for the smoke to be there.
Speaker 1 Summary
Y concludes that the photograph is good. This is based on the fact it’s attractive.
Speaker 2 Summary
Z concludes that it’s a bad photograph. This is based on the fact it doesn’t make a statement.
Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. They disagree on whether the photograph is good.
A
a photograph’s composition should be related to a statement that it makes
Neither speaker has an opinion. Although Y mentions composition, and Z mentions making a statement, neither discusses the relationship between composition and making a statement.
B
a photograph that is not attractive can still be a good photograph
Y doesn’t have an opinion. He assumes that attractiveness is sufficient to make a photograph good. But he doesn’t discuss whether attractiveness is necessary to be a good photograph.
C
a photograph that makes no statement can still be attractive
Y doesn’t have an opinion. He doesn’t note whether the photograph makes a statement or not, and doesn’t discuss any relationship between making a statement and being an attractive photograph.
D
attractiveness by itself can make a photograph a good photograph
This is a point of disagreement. Y believes attractiveness is sufficient to make a photograph good (this is Y’s assumption). Z believes it’s not sufficient, because if it doesn’t make a statement, it still wouldn’t be good.
E
attractive composition and prettiness are the same feature
Neither has an opinion. Neither discusses a relationship between an attractive composition and prettiness.