Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 135 - Section 4 - Question 14
May 13, 2012
Summarize Argument: Causal Explanation
Global warming is unlikely to cause more frequent and intense tropical storms. Early predictions suggested that global warming would increase the frequency and intensity of tropical storms by raising ocean temperatures conducive to such storms. However, this is unlikely because global warming will have other effects, such as changes in wind flow, that will counteract its impact on tropical storm development.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the geographer’s opinion that early predictions about global warming’s impact on tropical storm development were wrong. The geographer concludes that global warming will probably not cause more frequent and intense tropical storms.
A
Tropical storms are especially likely to form over warm ocean surfaces.
This answer is incorrect because it summarizes the context of the stimulus. It explains why some predicted that global warming would lead to more frequent and intense tropical storms: tropical storms are more likely to form over warm oceans.
B
Contrary to early discussions, global warming is not the only factor affecting the frequency and intensity of tropical storms.
This misstates the conclusion. The correct conclusion is that global warming will probably not result in more frequent and intense storms. However, this answer claims that the conclusion is about global warming not being the only factor affecting storm frequency and intensity.
C
If global warming were reversed, tropical storms would be less frequent and less intense.
This isn’t an argument made in the stimulus. The geographer doesn’t consider what would be required to reverse global warming; she only disputes one prediction about the effects global warming may have. Since this claim isn’t made in the stimulus, it can’t be the main conclusion.
D
Instabilities in wind flow will negate the effect of global warming on the formation of tropical storms.
This addresses a premise, not the main conclusion. The geographer uses global warming's effect on wind flow to support her conclusion that global warming won't lead to more intense and frequent storms. Since this claim is supporting evidence, it can't be the main conclusion.
E
Global warming probably will not produce more frequent and intense tropical storms.
This accurately captures the main conclusion: the geographer believes that predictions about global warming’s effect on tropical storms were likely incorrect. The answer summarizes this by stating that global warming probably won't lead to more frequent and intense storms.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 135 - Section 4 - Question 15
May 13, 2012
Summarize Argument
The stimulus isn’t an argument yet, since there aren’t any premises. We are asked to support the conclusion by filling in the blank with a premise.
The author concludes that copyright sometimes goes beyond its original purpose, which was to promote the spread of ideas by allowing authors to earn fair financial rewards for their work. He supports this by saying that ______.
The author concludes that copyright sometimes goes beyond its original purpose, which was to promote the spread of ideas by allowing authors to earn fair financial rewards for their work. He supports this by saying that ______.
Notable Assumptions
To effectively fill in the blank, the correct answer must show how copyright sometimes goes beyond its original purpose of spreading ideas.
A
publication of copyrighted works is not the only way to circulate ideas
Irrelevant. There may be other ways to spread ideas, but spreading ideas was still the original purpose of copyright. (A) fails to address how copyright sometimes goes beyond that purpose.
B
authors are willing to circulate their works even without any financial reward
Irrelevant. Even if some authors circulate ideas without copyright, it doesn’t change the fact that the original purpose of copyright was to further circulate ideas. (B) fails to address how copyright sometimes goes beyond that purpose.
C
authors are unable to find a publisher for their copyrighted work
Irrelevant. The original purpose of copyright was to promote the spread of ideas by allowing authors to earn financial rewards for their work. The fact that some authors can’t find publishers tells us nothing about how copyright sometimes goes beyond that purpose.
D
there is no practical way to enforce copyrights
If copyrights are difficult to enforce, they may be unable to achieve their original purpose. But this doesn’t describe how copyrights sometimes go beyond their original purpose.
E
copyrights hold for many years after an author’s death
If an author is no longer alive, he can’t circulate ideas or earn financial rewards for his work. So, copyrights that hold after an author’s death are going beyond their original purpose.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 135 - Section 4 - Question 16
May 13, 2012Economist: There was nothing at all bumbling about my warning. Indeed, it convinced the country’s leaders to change economic policies, which is what prevented a recession.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The economist concludes that his warning that the country’s economy would go into recession if policies weren’t changed was not bumbling. He supports this by saying that his warning led the country’s leaders to change economic policies, which prevented the recession.
Describe Method of Reasoning
The economist’s prediction relied on a condition. He predicted that the economy would go into recession if policies weren’t changed. But the economist shows that this condition wasn’t met— because of his warning, economic policies were changed. As a result, he concludes that his warning wasn’t bumbling and ineffective and suggests that it actually led to the prevention of the recession.
A
indicating that the state of affairs on which the economist’s prediction was conditioned did not obtain
The economist’s prediction was conditioned on economic policies staying the same. By showing that policies were changed (i.e. that “the state of affairs on which [his] prediction was conditioned did not obtain”), he refutes the critic’s claim that his prediction was bumbling.
B
distinguishing between a prediction that has not yet turned out to be correct and one that has turned out to be incorrect
The economist doesn’t suggest that his prediction might still be correct, nor does he distinguish between types of predictions. He’s not concerned with whether his prediction came to pass; instead, he focuses on disproving the claim that his warning was bumbling or pointless.
C
attempting to show that the critic’s statements are mutually inconsistent
The economist refutes the critic’s claim that his warning was bumbling, but he doesn’t point out any inconsistencies within the critic’s argument.
D
offering a particular counterexample to a general claim asserted by the critic
The critic asserts a very specific claim about the economist’s prediction, not a general one. And the economist doesn't respond by offering a counterexample, but shows that the condition on which his prediction depended was not met.
E
offering evidence against one of the critic’s factual premises
The economist implicitly accepts both of the critic’s factual claims (that he predicted a recession if policies weren’t changed and that economic growth was stronger this year). Instead of disputing these claims, he points out that the condition for his prediction wasn’t met.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 135 - Section 4 - Question 17
May 13, 2012Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 135 - Section 4 - Question 18
May 13, 2012Hospitals, universities, labor unions, and other institutions may well have public purposes and be quite successful at achieving them even though each of their individual staff members does what he or she does only for selfish reasons.
Summary
The individual staff members of hospitals, universities, labor unions, and other institutions do their work only for selfish reasons. However, the institutions themselves can still have public purposes and can achieve these public purposes successfully.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Whether an institution can successfully achieve its public purpose may not depend on the intentions of that institution’s individual staff members.
An institution can possess a property that its members do not possess.
A
What is true of some social organizations is not necessarily true of all such organizations.
This is unsupported. The stimulus does not compare different kinds of social organizations; it only speaks to those institutions with public purposes.
B
An organization can have a property that not all of its members possess.
This is strongly supported. We are told that even though the staff members of an institution are selfishly motivated, the institution can have and achieve public purposes. Thus, the institution can have a property (pursuing public purposes) that not all of its members possess.
C
People often claim altruistic motives for actions that are in fact selfish.
This is unsupported. The stimulus does not tell us whether the staff members, who are selfish, claim to have altruistic motives. It merely tells us that the institution can have altruistic motives even though its members do not.
D
Many social institutions have social consequences unintended by those who founded them.
This is unsupported. The stimulus tells us nothing about the founders of these institutions or what their original intentions might have been. We only know that the institutions are currently able to have and achieve public purposes.
E
Often an instrument created for one purpose will be found to serve another purpose just as effectively.
This is unsupported. The stimulus does not refer to the creation or intended purpose of any instrument. We only know that an institution can have public purposes despite its selfish staff members.