Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 4 - Question 21
August 17, 2012
Summary
The stimulus can be diagrammed as follows:
Notable Valid Inferences
If the sanitation department is to stay within its budget, some residents will put more recyclables in with their regular garbage.
If the city starts requiring residents to sort the materials that they put out for recycling, there will be more recyclables buried in the city’s landfill.
If the sanitation department is to stay within its budget, more recyclables will be buried in the city’s landfill.
If the city starts requiring residents to sort the materials that they put out for recycling, there will be more recyclables buried in the city’s landfill.
If the sanitation department is to stay within its budget, more recyclables will be buried in the city’s landfill.
A
Most of the city’s residents will continue to recycle even if a sorting requirement is implemented.
Could be false. The stimulus does nothing to rule out this possibility—maybe the residents that will put more recyclables in with their regular garbage will stop recycling altogether, and maybe these residents make up the majority!
B
If the city starts requiring residents to sort their recyclables, then all of the residents who continue to recycle will sort their recyclables.
Could be false. It’s quite possible that some residents might continue to recycle but ignore the sorting mandate.
C
Implementing the sorting requirement would not cause the city’s annual cost of sending garbage to its landfill to exceed its current annual cost of sorting recyclables.
Could be false. The stimulus doesn’t claim that sorting recyclables will keep the department in budget—staying in budget is not a necessary condition for recyclable sorting! Also, (C) references the city’s costs, but the stimulus discusses the sanitation department specifically.
D
The amount of recyclables going to the city’s landfill will increase if the sanitation department stays within its budget.
Must be true. By chaining the conditionals, we see that “more recyclables in landfill” is a necessary condition of the sanitation department staying within its budget.
E
If the city implements the sorting requirement, the sanitation department will stay within its budget.
Could be false. This answer choice is a necessary vs. sufficient condition confusion! “Require sorting” is a necessary condition of “stay within budget”, not the reverse. Requiring sorting does not guarantee that the sanitation department will stay within its budget.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 4 - Question 22
August 17, 2012
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author concludes that the meerkat sentinel’s behavior as it dashes for cover after seeing a predator is motivated at least in part by altruism. This is because by dashing for cover, the sentinel alerts group members to the presence of the predator.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the meerkat sentinel intends to alert group members to danger when it dashes to cover. This overlooks the possibility that the sentinel solely intends to save itself, and the fact other meerkats are alerted to danger could be an unintentional side effect of dashing to save itself.
A
appealing to evidence that tends to undermine rather than support the argument’s conclusion
The evidence does not undermine the conclusion, because it doesn’t tend to suggest that the sentinel’s behavior is not altruistic. The evidence shows that the sentinel’s dashing to cover “alerts other group members to the presence of danger.”
B
appealing to evidence that presupposes the truth of the argument’s conclusion
(B) describes circular reasoning. The author’s evidence does not restate the conclusion. The conclusion asserts that the sentinel’s behavior is altruistic. The evidence does not repeat the idea that the behavior is altruistic.
C
inferring solely from an effect produced by an action that a purpose of the action is to produce that effect
The author concludes that the sentinel’s behavior is motivated by a desire to warn others of danger merely because the behavior happens to alert others of danger. This overlooks that the effect of the behavior could be unintended by the sentinel.
D
inferring solely from the claim that the behavior of a meerkat sentinel is not entirely selfish that this behavior is entirely altruistic
The author does not conclude that the behavior is “entirely” altruistic. The conclusion is that the behavior is motivated “at least in part by altruism.”
E
concluding that a claim is false on the grounds that insufficient evidence has been offered to support it
The author does not conclude that the sentinel’s behavior is partially altruistic based on a claim that there’s no evidence the behavior isn’t altruistic.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 4 - Question 23
August 17, 2012Jolene: I disagree. Although some shrimp farms have proved unsustainable and have been quickly abandoned, properly built shrimp farms take a long time to construct and are costly to operate. Most owners try to make sure that their farms are productive for many years.
Speaker 1 Summary
Alex claims that shrimp farming results in environmental damage because investors make quick profits and then abandon the farms.
Speaker 2 Summary
Jolene disagrees with Alex's reasoning, arguing that although some farms have been unsustainable and abandoned, properly built shrimp farms are expensive, take a long time to construct, and are intended to be productive for many years.
Objective
Disagree: Alex and Jolene disagree over whether Shrimp farming often results in quick profits and quickly abandoning the farms.
A
most owners of shrimp farms eventually abandon their farms
Alex would likely agree. He believes investors make quick profits and leave. Jolene does not have an opinion on this. Although she says most owners “try to make sure” their farms are productive for many years, there is not enough information to know her opinion of this statement.
B
shrimp farming often yields a quick, easy profit
Alex agrees with this when he argues that investors make quick profits before abandoning the farms. Jolene disagrees when she acknowledges that properly built shrimp farms are costly and take a long time to operate. She specifies that “most owners” try to be productive.
C
shrimp farming hardly ever damages the environment
Alex clearly disagrees with this, and it is too strong for Jolene to have an opinion on. Jolene never specifies whether she thinks shrimp farming “hardly” damages the environment.
D
abandonment of a shrimp farm results in damage to the environment
Alex likely agrees with this statement. However, Jolene does not mention the negative impact of abandoning shrimp farms. If anything, she may agree (but that would not make this answer right)
E
some shrimp farmers are environmentally irresponsible
Alex would likely agree with this. Jolene does not mention anything about the environment and whether shrimp farmers are irresponsible.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 14
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 15
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 16
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 17
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 4 - Question 18
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 4 - Question 14
August 17, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 4 - Question 15
August 17, 2012
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Among workers who do similar amounts of typing, why do those who report the least control over their own work have a significantly higher risk of developing carpal tunnel syndrome as do those who report the most control?
Objective
The correct answer should help differentiate feeling the least control (or reporting the least control) from feeling the most control (or reporting the most control). This difference should provide a potential theory that could lead to those feeling the least control (or reporting the least control) to develop carpal tunnel syndrome at a higher rate.
A
Office workers who have the most control over their own work tend to do significantly less typing than do those who have the least control over their own work.
The stimulus already controlled for different amounts of typing: “among those who do similar amounts of typing...”
B
Feeling a lack of control over one’s own work tends to put one under emotional stress that makes one more susceptible to nerve disorders.
The stimulus told us carpal tunnel syndrome is a nerve disorder. If feeling lack of control can make one more susceptible to nerve disorders, this could account for why those reporting the least control get carpal tunnel syndrome (a nerve disorder) at a higher rate than those reporting the most control.
C
The keyboards on which office workers type tend to put typists’ arms and hands in positions that promote the development of carpal tunnel syndrome.
This doesn’t differentiate workers reporting the least control from those reporting the most. We have no reason to think workers reporting the least control are more likely to use the keyboards described in this answer.
D
Among office workers who rarely use keyboards, the rate of carpal tunnel syndrome is much higher for those who feel that they lack control over their own work.
The stimulus already controls for typing amount. Whether workers rarely use keyboards or use keyboards a lot, among those who do similar amounts of typing, people reporting the least control get carpal tunnel syndrome at a higher rate. Why? This answer doesn’t provide a theory.
E
Office workers who have the most control over their own work tend to perform repetitive motions other than typing more often than do office workers with the least control over their own work.
This makes the discrepancy more difficult to explain. If those who have the most control perform repetitive motions more than those who have the last control, we’d expect those who report feeling the most control to get carpal tunnel syndrome at a higher rate.