LSAC LSAC Certifications LSAT-TEST Questions & Answers

• Question 481:

  Leatherbacks, the largest of the sea turtles, when subjected to the conditions of captivity, are susceptible to a wide variety of fatal diseases with which they would never come in contact if they lived in the wild. It is surprising; therefore, that the likelihood that a leatherback will reach its theoretical maximum life expectancy is about the same whether that animal is living in captivity or in the wild.

  Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy?

  A. Fewer diseases attack leatherbacks than attack other large aquatic reptiles.

  B. The average life expectancy of sea turtles in general is longer than that of almost all other marine animals.

  C. Most leatherbacks that perish in the wild are killed by predators.

  D. Few zoologists have sufficient knowledge to establish an artificial environment that is conducive to the well-being of captive leatherbacks.

  E. The size of a leatherback is an untrustworthy indicator of its age.

  Correct Answer: C

  "Resolve the discrepancy" means Paradox, so let's scope out the mystery and think about what might resolve it. Paraphrase: Leatherbacks in captivity are prone to deadly diseases that they would never get out in the wild. Considering this, the author finds it odd that leatherbacks in the wild don't seem to have a greater chance of reaching maximum life expectancy. But just because one aspect of captivity is more life-threatening for leatherbacks doesn't mean there aren't other factors that make captivity actually safer for them. So we should look for a choice that, if true, would balance out the equation. C. provides an obvious solution. Predators would presumably not be a problem for turtles in captivity,but they're a huge source of danger for those in the wild. So while certain diseases may kill only the captive leatherbacks, predators even the score out in the wild. If option [Most leatherbacks that perish in...] is true, then the similarity in the likelihood of reaching the maximum life expectancy between leatherbacks cooped up and those swimming free seems more understandable.

• Question 482:

  Editorial: The structure of the present school calendar was established to satisfy the requirements of early-twentieth-century agricultural life. In those days, farmers needed their children to have long breaks during which they could remain at home and help with the harvest. The contemporary school year is thus made up of periods of study interspersed with long breaks. But agricultural life no longer occupies most of our citizens, so we can now make changes that serve the interests of children. Therefore, long breaks should be removed from the school calendar.

  Which one of the following is an assumption on which the editorial's argument depends?

  A. During long breaks children have a tendency to forget what they have learned.

  B. Children of farmers need to continue observing a school calendar made up of periods of study interspersed with long breaks.

  C. Long breaks in the school calendar should be replaced with breaks that are no longer than workers' average vacations.

  D. A change in the present school calendar that shortened breaks would serve the interests of agricultural life.

  E. A school calendar made up of periods of study without long breaks would serve the interests of children more than a school calendar with long breaks.

  Correct Answer: E

  We lead off with an Assumption question, so we know to look for the usual suspects: scope shifts, gaps in the reasoning, and stray terms that need to be connected. Here, the latter applies. Did you notice the issue that appears to drop in out of nowhere? The argument hums along nicely until the notion of children's interests is introduced. How do we know what would "serve the interests of children" if the author doesn't tell us? If a factor (agricultural needs) that made long school breaks necessary is no longer relevant, one could certainly argue that long breaks are no longer necessary, but to say that long breaks should be eliminated in the name of student interests requires an additional step -- the author has to somehow show that shorter breaks would actually be better for children.

• Question 483:

  Sociologist: Suggestions for improved efficiency that derive from employers are unlikely to elicit positive responses from employees, who tend to resent suggestions they did not generate. An employer should therefore engage the employee in a non-threatening dialogue that emphasizes the positive contributions of the employee to the development of such ideas. Then the ideas employers want to try will be implemented more quickly and effectively.

  Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the sociologist's reasoning?

  A. Employees are more likely to accept suggestions for improved efficiency when these suggestions are not obviously directed at them.

  B. Employees are more likely to carry out ideas for improved efficiency that they believe they have participated in generating.

  C. Employees are more likely to implement ideas for improved efficiency that derive from a dialogue in which they have participated than from a dialogue in which they have not participated.

  D. Employees are more likely to generate good ideas for improved efficiency when they do not feel resentment about the process that attempts to formulate such ideas.

  E. Employees are more likely to resent employers who attempt to implement the employers5rather than the employees' ideas for improved efficiency.

  Correct Answer: B

  Finally, we need to find the principle that helps the argument, which means we're looking for a strengthener stated in general terms. According to the sociologist, employees don't like to be told flat-out by their employers how to improve efficiency. Instead, an employer should have a more personable chat with an employee, in which both can contribute to the discussion. This will secure employee buy-in, so to speak, and will result in better implementation of the ideas employers want to try. This is actually a masterpiece of corporate manipulation: The trick is to get employees to believe they're contributing, essentially in order to get them to work better (read: harder), while implementing "the ideas that employers want to try." Inherent in this scheme is the notion that employees will implement new ideas more quickly and efficiently if they perceive themselves to be a positive part of the process, instead of just having orders handed down to them. Option [Employees are more likely to carry out...] supports this in every way: Employees are more likely to implement new ideas on improving efficiency that they think they helped to generate.

• Question 484:

  In our solar system only one of the nine planets-- Earth--qualifies as fit to sustain life. Nonetheless, using this ratio, and considering the astonishingly large number of planetary systems in the universe, we must conclude that the number of planets fit to sustain some form of life is extremely large.

  The argument is questionable because it presumes which one of the following without providing justification?

  A. If a planet is Earth like, then life will arise on it.

  B. Our solar system is similar to many other planetary systems in the universe.

  C. The conditions necessary for life to begin are well understood.

  D. Life similar to Earth's could evolve under conditions very different from those on Earth.

  E. Most other planetary systems in the universe have nine planets.

  Correct Answer: B

  The stem tells us the argument is flawed, and even tells us the source of the problem: an unjustified assumption. So we'll bring all of our strategies for Flaw and Assumption questions to bear on the problem. The author concludes that there are a lot of planets able to sustain life, based on the fact that one out of the nine planets in our solar system sustains life, and there are a huge number of planetary systems in the universe. If, similar to our system, roughly one planet in each other system can sustain life, then this makes sense -- but what if this is not the case? What if the same ratio doesn't obtain out there in the far reaches of the universe? Then the conclusion would be unsupported. For the conclusion to stand, our solar system must be similar to many other systems (at least in this respect), and no evidence is provided to that effect.

• Question 485:

  Appliance dealer: Appliance manufacturers commonly modify existing models without giving the modified versions new model names. Some people have complained that this practice makes it impossible for consumers to be certain that the appliance they are about to purchase is identical to the one they may have seen at a neighbor's or read about in a consumer magazine. Yet manufacturers' modifications to existing models are invariably improvements that benefit the buyer. Therefore, consumers have little reason to object to this practice.

  Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the dealer's argument?

  A. Appliances are generally purchased with the expectation that they will continue to be used for several years.

  B. Appliances usually carry a model number that provides substantially more detailed information about the product than does the model name.

  C. Appliance manufacturers frequently sell identical products under several different model names.

  D. Improved versions of appliances typically become available before vendors have stopped selling the older versions of the appliance with the same model name.

  E. The high cost of product advertising makes appliance manufacturers generally reluctant to change model names to reflect modifications to their products.

  Correct Answer: D

  Another Weaken question, so as always we paraphrase the argument looking for familiar structures, gaps in the reasoning, and alternative possibilities. The conclusion is that consumers shouldn't object to manufacturers using old model numbers on upgraded appliances. The reason is that while some people complain that they can't tell if the model they're about to buy is the exact model they're interested in, all modifications are improvements over a previous model. So why should consumers worry about the practice? Well, what if it causes confusion between the old and newer models? What if someone wants a new and improved model she heard of but is sold an older model with the same model name? If option [Improved versions of...] is true, this would be a legitimate concern, and the conclusion that consumers have little reason to object to the practice would be weakened.

• Question 486:

  Reviewer: Although finalism -- the view that there are purposes in nature -- has been universally rejected, this book launches another attack on that view. Its arguments are based on a complete misunderstanding of the operation of pure chance in nature and so it fails as a critique of finalism. Finalism, therefore, is clearly more plausible than people have thought.

  Which one of the following is most closely parallel in its flawed reasoning to the flawed reasoning in the reviewer's argument?

  A. No literary historian still believes the claim that a single author wrote every word of this collection of works. Evidence on which that claim is based can be shown to be false by manuscript dating techniques, but these dating results have not been cited before. Therefore, it is quite likely that a single author did write every word of this collection of works.

  B. Few botanists deny that a recently discovered fernis the same species represented in ancient fossils. The botanists who first discovered this specimen deny that it is the same species as the ancient one, but they have spent little time studying the specimen. Therefore, the specimen is likely to be the same

  species represented in the ancient fossils.

  C. Bicycle engineers no longer believe that aluminum is as good a frame material as titanium. An engineer at Ace Bicycles has argued that aluminum is not as good as titanium because it breaks under pressure. But he is confused about the kind of pressure exerted on bicycles. Therefore, the claim that aluminum is as good a frame material as titanium makes more sense than bicycle engineers believe.

  D. Experts agree that red wines from France's Bordeaux region are the best in the world, and five are on this year's list of the world's top ten red wines. However, the best currently available Bordeaux wines are more than one year old, whereas other countries' best are not. Therefore, it is false that Bordeaux red wines are the best in the world this year.

  E. Sociologists agree that the psychological development of children may be impaired by watching too much television, though researchers argued recently that the quality of the parent-child relationship is more developmentally significant than television viewing. These researchers did not consider the longterm impact of television on children, so it is quite likely that the psychological development of children is impaired by watching too much television.

  Correct Answer: C

  Considering the sheer length of this Parallel Reasoning question, we have to believe that there are some shortcuts possible; after all, there's simply no time to slog through every word here. And indeed, the Training strategies cut it down to size. First, compare conclusions: The original conclusion, signaled by the trusty Keyword "therefore," is that finalism must be "more plausible" than previously thought. Scanning the choices, we see that four of them match this structure well enough, but option [Experts agree that red wines from...]. concludes that something "is false" and can be cut for that reason alone. In fact, the phrase "Therefore it is false" is all you need to read of option [Experts agree that red wines from..... Similarly, the evidence in the original begins with a view that has been "universally rejected." That's a totally unqualified statement that's not matched by option [Few botanists deny that a recently discovered...]'s "Few...deny" or option [Sociologists agree that the psychological development of...]'s notion that sociologists agree that something maybe the case.

• Question 487:

  Some types of organisms originated through endosymbiosis, the engulfing of one organism by another so that a part of the former becomes a functioning part of the latter. An unusual nucteomorph, a structure that contains DNA and resembles a cell nucleus, has been discovered within a plant known as a chlorarachniophyte. Two versions of a particular gene have been found in the DNA of this nucleomorph, and one would expect to find only a single version of this gene if the nucleomorph were not the remains of an engulfed organism's nucleus.

  Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?

  A. Only organisms of types that originated through endosymbiosis contain nucleomorphs.

  B. A nucleomorph within the chlorarachniophyte holds all of the genetic material of some other organism.

  C. Nucleomorphs originated when an organism endosymbiotically engulfed a chtorarachniophyte.

  D. Two organisms will not undergo endosymbiosisunless at least one of them contains a nucleomorph.

  E. Chlorarachniophytes emerged as the result of two organisms having undergone endosymbiosis.

  Correct Answer: E

  This next Inference question involves a scientifically challenging argument. But buried amidst the technical terms is some fairly straightforward formal logic, so hopefully you didn't let yourself get bogged down in the terminology. Endo (no reason not to shorten this) is a process by which one organism engulfs another and the engulfed organism becomes a functioning part of the whole. Something strange that looks like a cell nucleus (let's shorten its cumber somename to nuc) has been found inside a plant (chlor); can you see where this is going? Perhaps endosymbiosis occurred here? What follows requires some interpretation (and that's, after all, what Inference questions are all about--interpretingand combining): If the nuc was NOT originally part of an organism that got engulfed, then we'd expect one version of a particular gene in its DNA. That's a simple formal logic statement, albeit one with complicated terms. Nonetheless, the contrapositive applies: If there's NOT one version of the gene, then the nuc WAS part of something that got engulfed. And we're told, in fact, that there are TWO versions of the gene, so we know for sure that engulfing took place.

• Question 488:

  So-called "engineered foods," usually in powder or liquid form, consist of protein that is distilled from natural sources and supplemented with vitamins and minerals. Although the amino acids contained in such products stimulate the production of growth hormones, these hormones produce growth in connective tissue rather than in muscle mass; this does not improve muscle strength. Hence, athletes, who need to improve their muscular strength, should not consume engineered foods.

  The argument depends on assuming which one of the following?

  A. An increase in muscle mass produces an increase in strength.

  B. People who are not athletes require neither stronger connective tissue nor muscle strength.

  C. If an engineered food does not improve muscle strength, there is no other substantial advantage to athletes from consuming it.

  D. Consuming engineered foods that provide nutrients that can be obtained more easily elsewhere is unhealthy.

  E. Growth of muscle mass enhances muscle strength only when accompanied by growth of connective tissue.

  Correct Answer: C

  Here's another assumption question, so let's zero in on the components of the argument. The last sentence (signaled by the Keyword "Hence") contains the conclusion: Athletes looking to improve muscle strength should not consume engineered foods. The first sentence is largely irrelevant to this conclusion, but the muscle issue comes up in the second sentence, where we learn that the amino acids in engineered foods stimulate growth hormones, which causes growth of connective tissue but not muscle mass. The argument seems to make sense if increasing muscle mass is the only possible benefit from engineered foods--but what if there are other benefits? Wouldn't it then be reasonable to infer that even athletes who are interested in increasing muscle still might benefit from these foods, and should consider consuming them? This alternative possibility would wreak havoc with the argument, so the author must be assuming that outside of increasing muscle strength, consuming engineered foods confers no benefits at all to athletes.

• Question 489:

  Professor Beckstein: American Sign Language is the native language of many North Americans. Therefore, it is not a foreign language, and for that reason alone, no student should be permitted to satisfy the university's foreign language requirement by learning it. Professor Sedley: According to your argument, students should not be allowed to satisfy the university's foreign language requirement by learning French or Spanish either, since they too are the native languages of many North Americans. Yet many students currently satisfy the requirement by studying French or Spanish, and it would be ridiculous to begin prohibiting them from doing so.

  Professor Sedley uses which one of the following strategies of argumentation in responding to Professor Beckstein's argument?

  A. attempting to demonstrate that the reasoning used to reach a certain conclusion leads to another conclusion that is undesirable

  B. trying to show that a certain conclusion contradicts some of the evidence used to support it

  C. questioning an opponent's authority to address the issue under discussion

  D. offering an alternative explanation of the facts used to arrive at a specific conclusion

  E. agreeing with the conclusion of a particular argument while rejecting the evidence used to support the conclusion

  Correct Answer: A

  Now to this business of Sedley's "strategy of argumentation"; this is, as mentioned above, LSAT-speak for a Method of Argument question. This is actually not an uncommon line of reasoning: Sedley tries to show that if Beckstein's argument holds (if a language shared by many North Americans can't be used to satisfy the university's foreign language requirement), French and Spanish would not be able to satisfy the requirement either, based on Beckstein's criterion. But that, in Sedley's words, would be "ridiculous." The elements in option [attempting to demonstrate that the reasoning...] match his method perfectly: He's trying to show that the reasoning (stated above) used to form a conclusion (ASL should not be allowed to satisfy the requirement) would lead to another conclusion (don't allow French or Spanish either) that's undesirable (it would be ridiculous to prohibit French or Spanish from satisfying the requirement).

• Question 490:

  Professor Beckstein: American Sign Language is the native language of many North Americans. Therefore, it is not a foreign language, and for that reason alone, no student should be permitted to satisfy the university's foreign language requirement by learning it. Professor Sedley: According to your argument, students should not be allowed to satisfy the university's foreign language requirement by learning French or Spanish either, since they too are the native languages of many North Americans. Yet many students currently satisfy the requirement by studying French or Spanish, and it would be ridiculous to begin prohibiting them from doing so.

  Their statements commit Professors Beckstein and Sedley to disagreeing about which one of the following?

  A. whether American Sign Language is the native language of a significant number of North Americans

  B. whether any North American whose native language is not English should be allowed to fulfill the university's foreign language requirement by studying his or her own native language

  C. whether the university ought to retain a foreign language requirement

  D. whether any other universities in North America permit their students to fulfill a foreign language requirement by learning American Sign Language

  E. whether the fact that a language is the native language of many North Americans justifies prohibiting its use to fulfill the university's foreign language requirement

  Correct Answer: E

  Here's a two-question stimulus to chew on. The word "disagreeing" in the first stem signals a Point-At-Issue question. Professor Beckstein argues that because ASL is native to many North Americans, it shouldn't satisfy the university's foreign language requirement. Professor Sedley counters that French and Spanish fit the same definition, but it would be ridiculous to exclude them from satisfying the requirement. Both discuss North American students for whom English is not their native language, and whether or not those other languages should be allowed to satisfy the university's foreign language requirement. This common thread leads us to: Beckstein would answer yes, the fact justifies the prohibition; Sedley would say no, it doesn't.