LSAC LSAC Certifications LSAT-TEST Questions & Answers

• Question 581:

  People ought to take into account a discipline's blemished origins when assessing the scientific value of that discipline. Take, for example, chemistry. It must be considered that many of its landmark results were obtained by alchemists -- a group whose superstitions and appeals to magic dominated the early development of chemical theory.

  The reasoning above is most susceptible to criticism because the author

  A. fails to establish that disciplines with unblemished origins are scientifically valuable

  B. fails to consider how chemistry's current theories and practices differ from those of the alchemists mentioned

  C. uses an example to contradict the principle under consideration

  D. does not prove that most disciplines that are not scientifically valuable have origins that are in some way suspect

  E. uses the word "discipline" in two different senses

  Correct Answer: B

  The question stem tells you that you're looking for a flaw in the argument. The author's argument in a nutshell says that in order to assess the value of a scientific discipline, you have to look at its origins. And as an example, he cites chemistry. According to his argument, to assess the value of chemistry, we have to take into account that its early practitioners believed in magic. This should have prompted you to say, "So what? Who cares what alchemists believed?" And that's essentially what option [fails to consider how chemistry's current...] says. The author fails to consider that chemistry is no longer practiced by alchemists, who believe in magic, so it makes no sense to judge its value based on how it was practiced in the past.

• Question 582:

  Physician: Heart disease generally affects men at an earlier age than it does women, who tend to experience heart disease after menopause. Both sexes have the hormones estrogen and testosterone, but when they are relatively young, men have ten times as much testosterone as women, and women abruptly lose estrogen after menopause. We can conclude, then, that testosterone tends to promote, and estrogen tends to inhibit, heart disease.

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

  A. Hormones are the primary factors that account for the differences in age-related heart disease risks between women and men.

  B. Estrogen and testosterone are the only hormones that promote or inhibit heart disease.

  C. Men with high testosterone levels have a greater risk for heart disease than do postmenopausal women.

  D. Because hormone levels are correlated with heart disease they influence heart disease.

  E. Hormone levels do not vary from person to person, especially among those of the same age and gender.

  Correct Answer: D

  The question stem is just a wordy way of asking you to identify the logical flaw in the argument. This is a classic case of confusing correlation with causation. Just because X and Y appear together doesn't mean that X causes Y. Here the physician cites the evidence of high testosterone levels in younger men, and lower estrogen levels in post-menopausal women. The physician then couples this with the fact that men get heart disease earlier, and women get it later, and finally concludes that testosterone promotes heart disease, and estrogen tends to inhibit disease. Looking at this evidence, you can agree that hormone levels and heart disease do seem to be correlated, but does that necessarily mean that these hormones promote or inhibit disease? Might there be other causes? Couldn't the correlation just be coincidence? Once you have identified this flaw (and it should come naturally after having read numerous causal arguments) you should be able to go quickly to correct answer choice [Because hormone levels are correlated...].

• Question 583:

  Tony: A new kind of videocassette has just been developed. It lasts for only half as many vie wings as the old kind does but costs a third as much. Therefore, video rental stores would find it significantly more economical to purchase and stock movies recorded on the new kind of videocassette than on the old kind. Anna: But the videocassette itself only accounts for 5 percent of the price a video rental store pays to buy a copy of a movie on video; most of the price consists of royalties the store pays to the studio that produced the movie. So the price that video rental stores pay per copy would decrease by considerably less than 5 percent, and royalties would have to be paid on additional copies.

  Which one of the following, if true, would contribute most to a defense of Tony's position against Anna's reply?

  A. The price that video rental stores pay for movies recorded on videocassettes is considerably less than the retail price of those movies.

  B. A significant proportion of the movies on videocassette purchased by video rental stores are bought as replacements for worn-out copies of movies the stores already have in stock.

  C. The royalty fee included in the price that video rental stores pay for movies on the new kind of videocassette will be half that included in the price of movies on the old kind.

  D. Given a choice, customers are more likely to buy a movie on videocassette than to rent it if the rental fee is more than half of the purchase price.

  E. Many of the movies rented from video rental stores, particularly children's movies, average several viewings per rental fee.

  Correct Answer: C

  Our familiarity with Anna's argument should now help us to turn the tables on her as we rush to Tony's defense. Remember, the sticking point for Anna is royalties. If we can somehow get around that, or at least lessen the impact of the royalty fees, we'd be able to revive Tony's argument. And that's all the prephrase we need: Only one choice even mentions royalties, and it turns out to be the winner here. If, as option [The royalty fee included in the price that...] maintains, royalties on the new videocassettes are half that of the old, then the force of Anna's response would be severely weakened, and Tony's advocacy of the new tapes would once again seem reasonable.

• Question 584:

  Tony: A new kind of videocassette has just been developed. It lasts for only half as many vie wings as the old kind does but costs a third as much. Therefore, video rental stores would find it significantly more economical to purchase and stock movies recorded on the new kind of videocassette than on the old kind. Anna: But the videocassette itself only accounts for 5 percent of the price a video rental store pays to buy a copy of a movie on video; most of the price consists of royalties the store pays to the studio that produced the movie. So the price that video rental stores pay per copy would decrease by considerably less than 5 percent, and royalties would have to be paid on additional copies.

  Anna's reply is structured to lead to which one of the following conclusions?

  A. The royalties paid to movie studios for movies sold on videotape are excessively large.

  B. Video rental stores should always stock the highest-quality videocassettes available, because durability is more important than price.

  C. The largest part of the fee a customer pays to rent a movie from a video rental store goes toward the royalties the store paid in purchasing that movie.

  D. The cost savings to video rental stores that buy movies recorded on the cheaper videocassettes rather than movies recorded on the more durable ones will be small or nonexistent.

  E. If the price a video rental store pays to buy a movie on videocassette does not decrease, the rental fee the store charges on the movie will not decrease.

  Correct Answer: D

  Our next confrontation features Tony vs. Anna in a video debate. Tony asserts that video stores would make out economically if they bought and stocked movies recorded on the new kind of videocassette. The decreased lifespan of the new tapes, Tony reasons, is outweighed by their cheaper cost. Anna's reply, which is the focus of Q. 23, begins with the Contrast Keyword "But," so no doubt she takes exception to Tony's advice for the video stores. She points out that the cost of the videocassette is only a small fraction of the overall cost of buying a videotaped movie, the bulk of the expense residing in the royalty fee. Each time a tape wears out (and these new-fangled ones wear out faster than the older ones), a store incurs another royalty fee. It's not hard to see where Anna is going with this: The overall cost savings Tony touts will be very minimal, if they exist at all, because the area in which Tony's savings accrue represents only a tiny fraction of the overall cost.

• Question 585:

  The folktale that claims that a rattlesnake's age can be determined from the number of sections in its rattle is false, but only because the rattles are brittle and sometimes partially or completely break off. So if they were not so brittle, one could reliably determine a rattlesnake's age simply from the number of sections in its rattle, because one new section is. formed each time a rattlesnake molts.

  Which one of the following is an assumption the argument requires in order for its conclusion to be properly drawn?

  A. Rattlesnakes molt exactly once a year.

  B. The rattles of rattlesnakes of different species are identical in appearance.

  C. Rattlesnakes molt more frequently when young than when old.

  D. The brittleness of a rattlesnake's rattle is not, correlated with the length of the rattlesnake's life.

  E. Rattlesnakes molt as often when food is scarce as they do when food is plentiful.

  Correct Answer: E

  More debunking -- this time of an old rattlesnake folktale. We cannot, in fact, tell the age of a rattlesnake by the number of its rattle sections, but only because these sometimes break off. The author concludes (note the Conclusion Keyword "so") that if these sections didn't break off, we would be able to tell the age of a rattlesnake by counting its sections. This would certainly make sense if we knew the precise amount of time it takes a rattlesnake to form a new section, and this interval never changed. But notice that we're told only that a new section appears every time a snake molts. How often is that? If it's variable, then the author's claim is bogus -- we wouldn't be able to tell the age simply from the number of sections. In order for the claim in the last sentence to hold up, we need to know that the intervals at which rattlesnakes molt are consistent. Note that we don't need to know the exact time of the molting periods -- only that there is an exact timing for this and that it doesn't change. So choice [Rattlesnakes molt exactly once a year.] is a red herring whereas correct choice [Rattlesnakes molt as often when...] relates to the real issue at hand: If molting time is variable depending on food availability, then the whole theory goes out the window. The author must therefore assume that no such molting variations occur.

• Question 586:

  The new agriculture bill will almost surely fail to pass, the leaders of all major parties have stated that they oppose it.

  Which one of the following, if true, adds the most support for the prediction that the agriculture bill will fail to pass?

  A. Most bills that have not been supported by even one leader of a major party have not been passed into law.

  B. Most bills that have not been passed into law were not supported by even one member of a major party.

  C. If the leaders of all major parties endorse the new agriculture bill, it will pass into law.

  D. Most bills that have been passed into law were not unanimously supported by the leaders of all major parties.

  E. Most bills that have been passed into law were supported by at least one leader of a major party.

  Correct Answer: A

  Sometimes the simplest arguments prove to be the toughest questions. The conclusion is that the new bill will almost surely fail to pass. The evidence is that the leaders of all major parties have stated that they oppose it. In order to strengthen this argument, you need to find a statement that most accurately describes the situation in which this bill finds itself. In other words, you need to stay within the scope.

  Option [Most bills that have not been supported by...] says that most bills that have not been supported by even one leader (that's the same as our bill, which is opposed by leaders of all major parties) have not been passed into law (which is what our conclusion predicts--that the bill will fail to pass).

• Question 587:

  Scientist: Some critics of public funding for this research project have maintained that only if it can be indicated how the public will benefit from the project is continued public funding for it justified. If the critics were right about this, then there would not be the tremendous public support for the project that even its critics acknowledge.

  If the scientist's claims are true, which one of the following must also be true?

  A. The benefits derived from the research project are irrelevant to whether or not its funding is justified.

  B. Continued public funding for the research project is justified.

  C. Public support for the research project is the surest indication of whether or not it is justified.

  D. There is tremendous public support for the research project because it can be indicated how the public will benefit from the project.

  E. That a public benefit can be indicated is not a requirement for the justification of the research project's continued public funding.

  Correct Answer: E

  This one's tricky, and might have been a good candidate to skip during your first pass through the section. It's an Inference question, a kind that's typically not vulnerable to prephrasing, and it has a formal logic element jumbling together the terms "some," "only," "not," and the hypothetical "if." Eeek! Surely no picnic. But there is a clever way into this, and it involves working backwards, beginning at the end. That's where the most concrete information appears, so it makes sense to note that and work from there. Here's what we know: There is public support for the project; the critics acknowledge it. "If the critics were right about this" (referring to something that comes earlier), then there would NOT be support. But there is support, so guess what? The critics must be wrong. About what? About "this." What's "this"? It's what the critics "maintain" in the first sentence: Public funding for the project is justified only if the public can see the benefit. In other words, the critics believe that the public seeing the benefit is required for public funding to be justified -- the "only if" tells us that. And if the critics are wrong in thinking so, as we deduced above from the latter part of the stimulus, then the public seeing a benefit is NOT required for the justification of the public funding.

• Question 588:

  Columnist: A recent study suggests that living with a parrot increases one's risk of lung cancer. But no one thinks the government should impose financial impediments on the owning of parrots because of this apparent danger. So by the same token, the government should not levy analogous special taxes on hunting gear, snow skis, recreational parachutes, or motorcycles.

  Each of the following principles is logically consistent with the columnist's conclusion EXCEPT:

  A. The government should fund education by taxing nonessential sports equipment and recreational gear.

  B. The government should not tax those who avoid dangerous activities and adopt healthy lifestyles.

  C. The government should create financial disincentives to deter participation in activities it deems dangerous.

  D. The government should not create financial disincentives for people to race cars or climb mountains, even though these are dangerous activities.

  E. The government would be justified in levying taxes to provide food and shelter for those who cannot afford to pay for them.

  Correct Answer: C

  The stem tells us we need to find the principle that's inconsistent (i.e., logically conflicts) with the columnist's conclusion. So the first step is to identify that conclusion. The Keyword "so" signals the conclusion: we shouldn't apply taxes on a bunch of things connected to dangerous activities. What choice contradicts this conclusion? Only option [The government should create financial disincentives to...],

  according to which, we should use financial incentives (like taxes) to discourage dangerous activities (like parachuting, etc.).

• Question 589:

  If there are any inspired musical performances in the concert, the audience will be treated to a good show. But there will not be a good show unless there are sophisticated listeners in the audience, and to be a sophisticated listener one must understand one's musical roots.

  If all of the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true?

  A. If there are no sophisticated listeners in the audience, then there will be no inspired musical performances in the concert.

  B. No people who understand their musical roots will be in the audience if the audience will not be treated to a good show.

  C. If there will be people in the audience who understand their musical roots, then at. least one musical performance in the concert will be inspired.

  D. The audience will be treated to a good show unless there are people in the audience who do not understand their musical roots.

  E. If there are sophisticated listeners in the audience, then there will be inspired musical performances in the concert.

  Correct Answer: A

  This Inference question clearly has a formal logic feel to it, so you can bet that you'll need to know your contrapositives to find the correct answer. Here's the chain of statements: Inspired musical performances guarantee a good show. So IMP--> GS. But there won't be a good show unless there are sophisticated listeners. "X cannot be true unless Y" is logically equivalent to "X implies Y," and so the second statement means that if there is a good show, there must be sophisticated listeners. Combining this with the first sentence gives us IMP --> GS --> SL. Now, being a sophisticated listener requires one to know one's musical roots. So if there are sophisticated listeners out there, they must understand their musical roots. Throwing this in gives us IMP --> GS --> SL --> UMR. From here, many statements are deducible.

• Question 590:

  Only a very small percentage of people from the service professions ever become board members of the 600 largest North American corporations. This shows that people from the service professions are underrepresented in the most important corporate boardrooms in North America.

  Which one of the following points out a flaw committed in the argument?

  A. Six hundred is too small a sample on which to base so sweeping a conclusion about the representation of people from the service professions.

  B. The percentage of people from the service professions who serve on the boards of the 600 largest North American corporations reveals little about the percentage of the members of these boards who are from the service professions.

  C. It is a mistake to take the 600 largest North American corporations to be typical of corporate boardrooms generally.

  D. It is irrelevant to smaller corporations whether the largest corporations in North America would agree to have significant numbers of workers from the service professions on the boards of the largest corporations.

  E. The presence of people from the service professions on a corporate board does not necessarily imply that that corporation will be more socially responsible than it has been in the past

  Correct Answer: B

  As soon as you see percentages being discussed, you should pay close attention. And since the question stem tells you that there is a flaw in the argument, it's a good bet that the author is going to confuse the numbers in some way. The author concludes that people from the service professions are underrepresented in boardrooms because only a very small percentage of people from the service professions ever become board members of the largest corporations. Well, that doesn't make much sense. There are probably millions of people in any industry you can think of, including the service industry; but there are only a few people (relatively speaking) that are board members of the largest corporations. So by the author's reasoning, virtually every industry would be underrepresented. Therefore, the author's conclusion doesn't logically follow from the evidence. Option [The percentage of people from the service professions] correctly identifies this flaw; it points out that the way you tell whether a group is Underrepresented is to look at the percentage of board members who come from a particular group -- not by looking at what percentage of the group become board members. Once you have identified this fundamental flaw, none of the other answer choices should have distracted you. Note that options [It is a mistake to take the 600 largest...], [It is irrelevant to smaller corporations whether...] and [The presence of people from the service professions on...] have outside the scope elements, namely, corporate boardrooms generally, smaller corporations, and social responsibility.