Tüm alıştırma soruları

3960 soru

Soru 921Soru →

Arrange the following five argumentative statements into their most logical sequence, proceeding from foundational evidence to the intermediate conclusion, through secondary evidence, and finally to the main conclusion.

Öğeleri doğru sıraya koymak için sürükleyin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct sequence begins with the foundational premises defining microlensing and its application to rogue planets, leads to the intermediate conclusion that this method allows detection of these planets, introduces the secondary premise about verifying theoretical models, and ends with the main conclusion advocating for survey funding.
A well-structured logical argument flows from basic factual premises to derived claims, and finally to the ultimate recommendation. In this sequence, the definition of microlensing and its application to rogue planets provide the factual basis. These facts support the intermediate conclusion that astronomers can detect these planets. This intermediate conclusion is then combined with the secondary premise about the importance of verifying theoretical models, ultimately justifying the main conclusion that funding for these surveys is crucial.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the primary premises that introduce the core physical concepts.
The statements defining microlensing and applying it to rogue planets form the initial evidential base.
Arguments must establish basic facts before drawing logical inferences from them.
2
Locate the intermediate conclusion derived directly from the primary premises.
The statement beginning with 'Consequently' serves as the intermediate conclusion, deducing that rogue planets can be detected based on the initial physical facts.
An intermediate conclusion synthesizes early evidence to create a new, derived premise for the rest of the argument.
3
Identify secondary premises that connect the intermediate conclusion to the final goal.
The statement explaining the importance of detecting these planets for verifying theoretical models bridges the gap to the final conclusion.
Additional context is needed to explain why the capability established in the intermediate conclusion matters.
4
Identify the main conclusion.
The normative statement beginning with 'Therefore' and advocating for survey funding is the main conclusion.
The main conclusion is the ultimate point of the argument, supported by all prior premises and intermediate conclusions.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Intermediate Conclusions
Soru 922Soru →

According to the Galactic Trade Federation's new charter, a planet's trading status is upgraded to 'Prime' only if its government both abolishes tariffs and implements comprehensive environmental protections. Furthermore, implementing comprehensive environmental protections requires that the planet either transitions to renewable energy or imposes strict carbon quotas. However, no planet imposes strict carbon quotas without facing immediate economic sanctions.

Which one of the following statements can be properly inferred from the rules of the Galactic Trade Federation charter?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Any planet whose trading status is upgraded to 'Prime' and does not face immediate economic sanctions must transition to renewable energy.

Cevap

The statement regarding a planet that achieves 'Prime' status and avoids immediate economic sanctions transitioning to renewable energy.
The stimulus provides a chain of conditional relationships. First, 'Prime' status requires implementing comprehensive environmental protections. Second, implementing these protections requires either transitioning to renewable energy or imposing strict carbon quotas. Third, imposing quotas always leads to facing immediate economic sanctions. If we know a planet achieves 'Prime' status, it must implement protections. Because it does not face economic sanctions, we know from the contrapositive of the third rule that it did not impose quotas. Therefore, to fulfill the requirement of implementing protections, the planet is left with only one logical pathway: it must transition to renewable energy. The correct answer accurately represents this valid deductive chain.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Diagram the first conditional statement regarding the 'Prime' status.
Prime -> Abolish Tariffs (AT) AND Implement Protections (IP)
The phrase 'only if' introduces necessary conditions. For a planet to be upgraded to Prime, both AT and IP must occur.
2
Diagram the second conditional statement regarding environmental protections.
IP -> Transition to Renewable (TR) OR Impose Quotas (IQ)
The word 'requires' introduces a necessary condition, which in this case is a compound 'or' statement.
3
Diagram the third conditional statement and derive its contrapositive.
IQ -> Face Sanctions (FS). Contrapositive: ~FS -> ~IQ.
The phrase 'no [A] without [B]' translates to 'If A, then B'. The contrapositive reverses and negates the terms.
4
Chain the deductions together assuming a planet is Prime and does not face sanctions.
Prime -> IP -> TR OR IQ. Since ~FS -> ~IQ, the IQ option is eliminated. Thus, Prime AND ~FS -> TR.
Applying the rules to a Prime planet that avoids sanctions leaves transitioning to renewable energy as the only logical outcome to satisfy the environmental protections requirement.

Anahtar Kavram

Diagramming Conditional Statements and Formal Logic Chaining
Soru 923Soru →

Arrange the following statements to form a continuous logical chain that demonstrates how a sufficient assumption bridges the logical gap to justify the conclusion. The sequence must trace the conditional path from the initial trigger to the final outcome, ending with the main conclusion.

Öğeleri doğru sıraya koymak için sürükleyin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct logical order begins with the flat tax premise, moves to the simplified tax code intermediate premise, follows with the sufficient assumption about disposable income, and ends with the final conclusion.
A valid deductive argument using a sufficient assumption requires a closed logical loop. The correct sequence starts with the initial condition (flat tax), connects to the intermediate effect (simplified code), bridges to the final effect via the sufficient assumption (reduced reliance means more disposable income), and finally states the conclusion that logically follows from this chain.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion.
The statement starting with 'Therefore' is the conclusion and must be placed last.
Conclusions are derived from premises and assumptions, so they conclude the logical sequence.
2
Identify the starting premise.
The statement about 'Implementing a flat tax system' introduces the initial condition of the argument.
In a continuous logical chain, the sequence begins with the independent trigger condition.
3
Find the connecting intermediate premise.
The statement linking a 'simplified national tax code' to a reduction in 'reliance on professional tax preparation services' naturally follows the first premise.
This establishes the middle link of the conditional chain.
4
Identify the sufficient assumption.
The statement connecting the reduction in 'reliance on professional tax preparation services' to an 'increase in citizens' disposable income' acts as the assumption.
This assumption bridges the final logical gap, making the conclusion logically valid.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Sufficient Assumptions via Deductive Chains
Soru 924Soru →

A local news anchor reported: 'Last year, 20% of all crimes committed in our city were burglaries. This year, that figure has risen to 40%. Therefore, the absolute number of burglaries committed in our city must have increased this year.'

Which of the following represent statistical assumptions required to make the news anchor's conclusion valid? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The overall volume of crime in the city did not decrease by 50 percent or more from last year to this year.; The total number of all crimes committed this year is not significantly lower than the total number of crimes committed last year.

Cevap

The correct statements are those establishing that the total volume of all crimes did not drop drastically (specifically, not by 50 percent or more).
The argument concludes that the absolute number of burglaries increased based solely on an increase in the percentage of burglaries (from 20% to 40%). For this deduction to be mathematically valid, the baseline (total crimes) must not have decreased drastically. Specifically, since the percentage rate doubled, the total number of crimes cannot have dropped by 50% or more (otherwise 40% of the new total would be less than or equal to 20% of the old total). The correct choices correctly articulate this necessary mathematical boundary.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the premise and the conclusion of the argument.
Premise: Burglaries went from 20% to 40% of all crimes. Conclusion: The absolute number of burglaries increased.
Separating the evidence from the claim clarifies the logical gap being tested.
2
Recognize the logical flaw being tested.
The argument confuses a proportion with an absolute number. A larger percentage of a total only means a larger absolute amount if the total itself did not shrink drastically.
Identifying the archetype of the flaw helps predict the necessary assumption.
3
Translate the numerical relationship into a mathematical inequality.
Let last year's total crimes be XX and this year's be YY. The anchor concludes 0.40Y>0.20X0.40Y > 0.20X. For this to be true, we must assume Y>0.5XY > 0.5X.
Establishing the exact mathematical boundary shows what condition is strictly required for the conclusion to hold.
4
Evaluate the options against this mathematical requirement.
The options stating that total crime did not decrease by 50 percent or more, or drop significantly, perfectly match the Y>0.5XY > 0.5X requirement.
An assumption is a missing premise that is required for the conclusion to be valid.

Anahtar Kavram

Percentages vs. Numbers Flaws
Tahmini Süre:1m 0s
Soru 925Soru →

Match each logical argument on the left with the piece of evidence on the right that most strongly bolsters its conclusion.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

A software firm observed a 20% increase in productivity immediately after providing all developers with curved monitors. Management concludes the curved monitors caused the productivity boost.
Urban foxes exhibit significantly higher stress hormone levels than rural foxes. Biologists hypothesize that constant exposure to city traffic noise causes this chronic stress.
A clinical study found that individuals who consume breakfast daily have lower average cholesterol levels than those who skip breakfast. Researchers conclude that eating breakfast actively lowers cholesterol.
Traffic officials noted that intersections equipped with red-light cameras experience more rear-end collisions than intersections without them. They conclude the cameras cause these accidents by prompting abrupt braking.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The arguments logically pair with the evidence that targets their specific causal gaps: the monitor argument pairs with the evidence ruling out other workplace changes; the urban fox argument pairs with the evidence isolating noise from other city factors; the breakfast argument pairs with the evidence controlling for overall lifestyle habits; and the traffic camera argument pairs with the evidence establishing a safer baseline before installation.
Each correct match provides a piece of evidence that directly targets the logical vulnerability of the corresponding argument. They systematically strengthen the causal claims by either eliminating an alternative explanation, establishing a clear chronology to avoid selection bias, or demonstrating that the effect is strictly tied to the presence of the suspected cause.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze each argument to identify the premise, the conclusion, and the logical gap.
Identified that all four arguments assume a causal relationship based on a correlation or a chronological sequence.
Understanding the flaw or assumption in an argument is required before you can identify what evidence would strengthen it.
2
Examine the tech firm argument regarding monitors and productivity.
Paired with the evidence stating no other changes occurred at the firm, as it eliminates alternative causes for the productivity spike.
Causal claims based on sequence (post hoc ergo propter hoc) are strengthened when alternate simultaneous causes are ruled out.
3
Examine the biological argument regarding foxes and urban noise.
Paired with the evidence showing quiet urban areas do not produce stressed foxes, which isolates the noise variable.
Showing that the effect disappears when the specific cause is removed (even when other background factors remain) heavily strengthens a causal claim.
4
Examine the health argument regarding breakfast and cholesterol.
Paired with the evidence showing both groups had similar exercise and fat intake routines.
Correlational studies are vulnerable to third-variable problems. Controlling for other lifestyle factors strengthens the specific correlation.
5
Examine the traffic argument regarding cameras and collisions.
Paired with the evidence showing the camera intersections were actually safer before the cameras were installed.
This rules out reverse causation or selection bias (the idea that high-collision rates caused the cameras to be placed there, rather than the cameras causing the collisions).

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments by Ruling Out Alternatives and Controlling Variables
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 926Soru →

Financial Analyst: The manufacturing sector in Country X will likely experience a severe contraction this year. The global price of refined rhodium, a catalyst essential for the advanced electronics manufactured almost exclusively in Country X, has tripled in the past six months. Because manufacturers in Country X operate on very thin profit margins, they cannot absorb this cost increase without significantly raising their prices, an action that will inevitably cause a drastic drop in their sales volume.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The production of advanced electronics accounts for a large enough proportion of Country X's manufacturing sector that a drastic drop in their sales would cause a severe contraction in the sector as a whole.

Cevap

The production of advanced electronics accounts for a large enough proportion of Country X's manufacturing sector that a drastic drop in their sales would cause a severe contraction in the sector as a whole.
The argument commits a classic part-to-whole scope shift. The premises provide evidence that one specific industry—advanced electronics—will suffer a drastic drop in sales. However, the conclusion claims that the entire 'manufacturing sector' in Country X will experience a severe contraction. For this conclusion to be valid, the author must be assuming that the advanced electronics industry is significant enough to drag down the whole sector. Applying the Negation Test confirms this: if advanced electronics accounted for only a tiny fraction of the manufacturing sector, a drop in their sales would not cause the entire sector to contract, completely destroying the argument.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument to identify the main conclusion.
Conclusion: The manufacturing sector in Country X will likely experience a severe contraction this year.
Identifying the exact scope of the conclusion is the first step in finding the logical gap.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
Premises: Rhodium prices tripled. Rhodium is essential for advanced electronics made in Country X. Thin margins mean prices must rise, which will cause a drastic drop in advanced electronics sales volume.
Understanding the evidence provided shows us what the author has explicitly proven.
3
Compare the scope of the premises to the scope of the conclusion to spot the logical gap.
The premises prove a drastic drop in sales for 'advanced electronics'. The conclusion makes a claim about the 'entire manufacturing sector' of Country X.
Arguments often mistakenly assume that what is true of a part is true of the whole (Composition flaw).
4
Apply the Negation Test to evaluate potential assumptions.
Negating the correct statement: 'Advanced electronics do NOT account for a large enough proportion...' If true, a drop in electronics sales would have a negligible impact, and the entire sector would NOT severely contract. The argument collapses.
A necessary assumption must destroy the argument when negated. If the argument survives the negation, the assumption was not logically necessary.

Anahtar Kavram

Bridging Part-to-Whole Scope Shifts and the Negation Test
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 927Soru →

Paleontologist: The extinction of the marine reptile *Thalassadon* was caused by a rapid global cooling event, rather than by a viral pandemic as some scientists have proposed. Fossil records clearly indicate that *Thalassadon* populations drastically plummeted in the higher, colder latitudes hundreds of thousands of years before they disappeared from the warmer equatorial waters.

Statement: The paleontologist's argument logically depends on the assumption that the proposed viral pandemic did not originate in the higher latitudes and slowly spread toward the equator.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True
The statement accurately identifies a necessary assumption. The argument attempts to dismiss the viral pandemic theory by pointing out that the extinction started in colder climates. For this evidence to successfully dismiss the viral theory, the author must assume that the virus itself wouldn't produce that exact same geographic pattern.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's conclusion and primary supporting evidence.
The conclusion is that global cooling, not a virus, caused the extinction. The evidence is that the extinction occurred in colder, higher latitudes long before it reached warmer, equatorial waters.
Deconstructing the argument structure is required to evaluate any logical assumption.
2
Apply the Negation Test to the candidate assumption in the statement.
The negated assumption is: 'The proposed viral pandemic DID originate in the higher latitudes and slowly spread toward the equator.'
The Negation Test determines if an assumption is logically necessary; if the negated version destroys the argument, the assumption is necessary.
3
Evaluate the impact of the negated assumption on the paleontologist's argument.
If the virus spread from higher latitudes to the equator, it perfectly explains the extinction timeline, invalidating the paleontologist's attempt to use that timeline as definitive proof for global cooling over a virus.
A defender assumption must protect the argument from an alternate explanation of the specific evidence presented.

Anahtar Kavram

Ruling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender Assumptions)
Soru 928Soru →

Some environmentalists argue that ecosystems possess intrinsic moral standing. However, attributing intrinsic moral standing to an entity requires that the entity possesses a subjective experiential perspective—that is, it must be capable of consciously experiencing well-being or suffering. Because ecosystems are decentralized networks of interactions rather than unified, sentient beings, they lack this capacity. Therefore, the preservation of ecosystems can only be ethically justified on the basis of their instrumental value to sentient creatures.

Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the conclusion to be properly drawn?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The preservation of an entity that lacks intrinsic moral standing can be ethically justified only on the basis of its instrumental value to sentient creatures.

Cevap

The statement asserting that for entities lacking intrinsic moral standing, instrumental value to sentient creatures is the exclusive ethical justification for their preservation.
To guarantee the conclusion, we need to bridge the gap between the intermediate conclusion ('ecosystems lack intrinsic moral standing') and the main conclusion ('the preservation of ecosystems can only be ethically justified on the basis of their instrumental value to sentient creatures'). The correct statement acts as a perfect conditional bridge: if an entity lacks intrinsic moral standing, its preservation can only be justified by its instrumental value. Since ecosystems lack intrinsic moral standing, the conclusion necessarily follows.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The preservation of ecosystems can only be ethically justified on the basis of their instrumental value to sentient creatures.
This is the final claim that the author is attempting to prove, signaled by 'Therefore'.
2
Identify the premises and intermediate conclusion.
Premise 1: Intrinsic moral standing (IMS) requires a subjective experiential perspective (SEP). Premise 2: Ecosystems lack SEP. Intermediate Conclusion: Ecosystems lack IMS.
Breaking down the argument's structure reveals the established facts and the logical chain leading up to the logical gap.
3
Identify the logical gap between the intermediate conclusion and the main conclusion.
The argument establishes that ecosystems lack intrinsic moral standing, but jumps to a conclusion about what can justify their preservation.
A sufficient assumption must logically connect the end of the premise chain (lacking IMS) to the new concept introduced in the conclusion (exclusive justification via instrumental value).
4
Formulate the sufficient assumption.
If an entity lacks IMS, its preservation can only be justified by its instrumental value to sentient creatures.
Adding this conditional statement to the intermediate conclusion yields the main conclusion with 100% logical certainty.

Anahtar Kavram

Sufficient Assumptions (Bridging Intermediate Conclusions)
Soru 929Soru →

Economic Historian: The prolonged recession of the 1970s was characterized by severe instability within the national manufacturing sector. Yet, paradoxically, macroeconomic data from that era demonstrates that the national manufacturing sector, evaluated as a comprehensive whole, maintained an incredibly high rate of overall financial solvency. Therefore, it is historically inaccurate to suggest that any individual manufacturing corporation was operating on the brink of bankruptcy at that time.

Which of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the economic historian's reasoning?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: It takes for granted that a characteristic belonging to a comprehensive entity must also belong to each of its individual constituent parts.

Cevap

The option stating that it takes for granted that a characteristic belonging to a comprehensive entity must also belong to each of its individual constituent parts.
The correct answer accurately identifies the fallacy of Division. The historian concludes that no individual corporation was near bankruptcy (a property of the parts) based solely on the fact that the manufacturing sector as a comprehensive whole was financially solvent (a property of the whole). This reasoning is fundamentally flawed because an entire sector could be highly solvent on an aggregate level if the immense wealth of a few massive corporations masks the severe insolvency of many smaller ones.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument's structure to identify the main conclusion.
The main conclusion is that 'it is historically inaccurate to suggest that any individual manufacturing corporation was operating on the brink of bankruptcy at that time.'
Identifying the conclusion clarifies the exact claim the author is attempting to prove.
2
Identify the primary premise used to support the conclusion.
The core premise is that the 'national manufacturing sector, evaluated as a comprehensive whole, maintained an incredibly high rate of overall financial solvency.'
Understanding the evidence is necessary to evaluate the logical relationship between the premise and conclusion.
3
Evaluate the logical transition from the premise to the conclusion to pinpoint the reasoning error.
The historian takes a property of the collective group ('comprehensive whole' being highly solvent) and inappropriately applies it to every single member of that group ('any individual manufacturing corporation').
Recognizing the shift in scope from the macro-level whole to the micro-level parts reveals the Fallacy of Division.
4
Select the answer choice that perfectly matches this abstract logical flaw.
The correct choice translates this error into formal logic: assuming a characteristic of a 'comprehensive entity' must belong to its 'individual constituent parts.'
LSAT flaw questions require translating a specific contextual error into a generalized description of the fallacy.

Anahtar Kavram

Fallacy of Division (Part-to-Whole Reasoning)
Tahmini Süre:1m 45s
Soru 930Soru →

Public Health Official: A recent outbreak of waterborne illness in our municipality was definitively traced to agricultural runoff entering the regional reservoir. To guarantee the safety of our drinking water, the city council must mandate a total transition to indoor hydroponic farming for all regional agriculture. The rationale is straightforward: if we permit traditional outdoor farming to continue, our sole defense against contamination will be to drastically increase the concentration of chlorine in our water treatment facilities. Yet, epidemiological studies demonstrate that numerous chlorine-resistant pathogens survive such elevated chemical treatments, leaving the populace vulnerable. Consequently, the mandate for indoor hydroponic farming is an absolute necessity.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the public health official's reasoning?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: It takes for granted that there are no methods of counteracting the dangers of agricultural runoff under traditional outdoor farming other than increasing chlorine concentrations.

Cevap

The argument takes for granted that there are no methods of counteracting the dangers of agricultural runoff under traditional outdoor farming other than increasing chlorine concentrations.
The official's argument relies on a process of elimination: because the combination of traditional outdoor farming and increased chlorine fails to guarantee safety, we must mandate indoor hydroponic farming. This reasoning is structurally flawed because it artificially limits the available options. The correct answer points out this False Dilemma by noting that the official assumes, without evidence, that increased chlorine is the 'sole defense' available if traditional farming continues. The argument completely overlooks other potential solutions, such as alternative water filtration technologies (e.g., UV treatment, reverse osmosis) or physical runoff barriers.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that the city council must mandate a total transition to indoor hydroponic farming.
This is the primary claim the official is trying to prove, indicated by the conclusion indicator 'Consequently'.
2
Analyze the premises used to support the conclusion.
Premise 1: The illness was traced to agricultural runoff. Premise 2: If we allow outdoor farming, our sole defense is increasing chlorine. Premise 3: Pathogens survive elevated chlorine, leaving us vulnerable.
Understanding the evidence is necessary to see how the author bridges the premises to the conclusion.
3
Evaluate the logical connection between the premises and the conclusion to find the flaw.
The author argues for hydroponic farming solely by discrediting one specific alternative (outdoor farming + chlorine). The flaw is assuming these are the absolute only two options available to the municipality.
An argument by elimination is only logically valid if all possible alternatives are accurately considered. Failing to do so results in a False Dilemma.
4
Select the answer choice that perfectly describes this False Dilemma.
The correct option identifies that the argument completely overlooks other potential defenses against agricultural runoff in traditional farming settings.
This matches the structural flaw identified in the previous step.

Anahtar Kavram

A False Dilemma (or False Dichotomy) occurs when an argument presents two options as if they are the only possibilities, when in fact other viable alternatives exist. The argument then eliminates one option to falsely justify the other.
Tahmini Süre:1m 45s
Soru 931Soru →

Corporate Consultant: To boost overall employee productivity, our company should replace standard office chairs with standing desks. A recent occupational health study found that office workers who switched to standing desks experienced a significant decrease in chronic back pain. Furthermore, it is well established that employees who experience less overall physical discomfort are able to maintain concentration on their tasks for significantly longer periods.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The reduction in back pain experienced by standing desk users is not typically offset by an increase in other forms of physical discomfort.

Cevap

The assumption that the reduction in back pain is not offset by an increase in other forms of physical discomfort.
The argument relies on a shift from a specific benefit (reduced back pain) to a general requirement (less overall physical discomfort). For this shift to be valid, the author must assume that the specific benefit isn't canceled out by a new specific harm. By negating the correct option—assuming that other discomforts DO increase and offset the back pain reduction—the employees would no longer experience the 'less overall physical discomfort' required to increase concentration, causing the argument to fall apart.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The company should replace standard chairs with standing desks to boost overall employee productivity.
This sets the target that the premises must support.
2
Identify the premises providing support.
Standing desks decrease chronic back pain. Less 'overall' physical discomfort leads to longer concentration periods (which presumably boosts productivity).
This outlines the causal chain the author believes will occur.
3
Find the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The argument conflates a specific reduction (decrease in back pain) with a general state (less overall physical discomfort).
A decrease in back pain only leads to less overall physical discomfort if standing desks do not simultaneously cause other types of pain.
4
Apply the Negation Test to the correct answer candidate.
If the reduction in back pain IS offset by an increase in other forms of physical discomfort, the employees do not achieve 'less overall physical discomfort'.
Because the negated assumption destroys the link between the premises and the conclusion, it is logically necessary for the argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Necessary Assumption
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 932Soru →

Economist: Recent studies demonstrate that implementing a nominal congestion pricing fee in the city's central business district during peak commuting hours—provided that strict exemptions are granted for emergency and commercial delivery vehicles—can marginally reduce gridlock while generating dedicated revenue for public transit expansion.

Politician: The economist clearly wants to cripple our local economy. If we construct an insurmountable financial barrier around our city center, everyday citizens will be completely locked out of participating in civic life, effectively turning the downtown area into an exclusive playground for the ultra-wealthy.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the politician's reasoning?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: It distorts the scope and severity of a proposed intervention to attack a substantially more extreme position than the one actually advocated.

Cevap

The correct answer is the option stating that the reasoning distorts the scope and severity of a proposed intervention to attack a substantially more extreme position than the one actually advocated.
The correct answer accurately identifies that the politician commits a Straw Man fallacy. The economist proposes a highly qualified intervention: a 'nominal' fee during 'peak commuting hours' with 'strict exemptions'. The politician mischaracterizes this nuanced proposal as an 'insurmountable financial barrier' that will leave citizens 'completely locked out'. By exaggerating the proposal's severity and scope, the politician creates an extreme, fabricated version of the argument that is much easier to attack.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the economist's original argument.
The economist proposes a highly qualified, limited intervention: a 'nominal' fee during 'peak hours' with 'strict exemptions'.
Establishing the exact parameters of the original claim is necessary to evaluate the accuracy of any subsequent critique.
2
Analyze the politician's rebuttal.
The politician characterizes the plan as an 'insurmountable financial barrier' that will leave everyday citizens 'completely locked out' of civic life.
Understanding how the respondent characterizes the original claim reveals the logical structure of their counterargument.
3
Compare the two positions to identify the logical vulnerability.
The politician grossly exaggerates the severity (nominal vs. insurmountable) and scope (peak hours/exemptions vs. completely locked out) of the economist's proposal.
This mismatch demonstrates that the politician is attacking a fabricated, extreme version of the argument rather than the actual proposal.
4
Evaluate the options to find the one describing this distortion.
The option describing a distortion of scope and severity perfectly matches this Straw Man fallacy, while other options point to secondary internal flaws or incorrect fallacies.
In LSAT flaw questions involving a rebuttal, the primary flaw is almost always how the second speaker structurally misuses or misrepresents the first speaker's premises.

Anahtar Kavram

Straw Man Fallacy (Mischaracterization of an Opponent's Argument)
Soru 933Soru →

Analyze each of the following scenarios. Match each paradoxical situation (apparent discrepancy) with the explanatory statement that logically resolves the paradox.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Despite a manufacturing plant instituting a 25% increase in the hourly wage rate specifically to address acute labor shortages by incentivizing employees to work more shifts, the total number of hours worked by the plant's workforce dropped substantially in the subsequent quarter.
A telecommunications company deployed an advanced automated routing system that instantly resolves all basic customer inquiries, yet the average duration that customers spend waiting on hold to speak with human representatives has more than doubled.
After a municipal public health initiative successfully persuaded a large demographic to substitute their standard cigarettes with lower-tar, lower-nicotine alternatives, the incidence of smoking-related cardiovascular distress within that demographic actually surged.
A prestigious fashion house significantly reduced the retail price of its least popular handbag model in an attempt to stimulate sales volume, but immediately following the price reduction, consumer purchases of that specific model ceased entirely.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct pairings reconcile the contradictory premises by introducing new factual context: target income thresholds explain the drop in labor hours, complex-case concentration explains the extended customer service wait times, compensatory inhalation behavior explains the negative health outcomes, and status-symbol dynamics explain the retail failure.
Each correct resolution provides a novel piece of factual information that allows both original premises of the paradox to be simultaneously true. By shifting the context—whether through changing the composition of tasks, revealing hidden consumer motives, identifying target income thresholds, or demonstrating behavioral compensation—the apparent contradictions are logically resolved.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze each scenario to identify the two conflicting premises.
Identified the expected outcome of an action versus the surprising actual outcome (e.g., higher wages leading to fewer hours worked).
Resolving a paradox requires precisely understanding the gap between expectation and reality.
2
Evaluate the explanatory statements to find a mechanism that allows both premises of the paradox to be true simultaneously.
Identified mechanisms such as compensatory behavior, changing task composition, and Veblen-good pricing dynamics.
A valid resolution must actively bridge the gap without contradicting either of the original facts provided in the scenario.
3
Match each identified mechanism to its corresponding specific paradox.
Successfully paired the four independent domains (labor economics, technological adoption, public health, consumer psychology) with their respective logical resolutions.
Ensures structural and topical alignment between the surprising outcome and the explanation.

Anahtar Kavram

Explaining Surprising Outcomes
Soru 934Soru →

Analyze the four logical arguments below. Each argument contains a specific causal gap or unstated vulnerability. Match each argument to the single piece of new evidence that most robustly strengthens its conclusion by resolving that specific gap.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Tracking data over fifteen years shows the median life expectancy of Alpine marmots rising sharply, mirroring a localized collapse in the golden eagle population. Ecologists assert that the alleviation of direct eagle predation allowed the marmots to achieve longer lifespans.
Following the implementation of aggressive state subsidies for domestic solar panel manufacturing, the nation's volume of fossil fuel imports plummeted by 30%. Policymakers argue these financial incentives were the primary driver of the reduced reliance on traditional energy.
Participants navigating complex logical tasks in rooms illuminated by short-wavelength blue light completed them 15% faster than cohorts in red-lit rooms. Researchers conclude the specific spectral frequency of the light intrinsically accelerates neurological processing speed.
Artifact analysis at an excavation reveals that 85% of recovered cutting implements exhibit asymmetrical micro-abrasions exclusively on their leftward-facing edges. Anthropologists hypothesize this ancient population possessed a disproportionately high rate of left-handedness.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct pairings successfully align each causal gap with the evidence that bridges it: the marmot predation claim with aerial trauma data, the solar policy claim with total energy audits, the light frequency claim with color-neutralization controls, and the anthropology claim with experimental tool replication.
Each correct match directly addresses the critical flaw in its respective argument. The marmot argument is strengthened by directly confirming the mechanism of reduced mortality (aerial ambush). The solar subsidy argument is strengthened by ruling out the most likely alternative causes (lower energy demand or other renewables). The blue light argument is strengthened by a control test that isolates light frequency as the active variable. The tool argument is strengthened by explicitly verifying the mechanical relationship between hand dominance and wear patterns.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the Alpine marmot argument to identify its causal gap.
Identified that the correlation between fewer eagles and longer-living marmots could be coincidental (e.g., caused by better food).
Strengthening a causal claim requires showing that the proposed cause directly produced the effect.
2
Match the marmot argument to the available evidence.
Selected the evidence regarding 'aerial ambush trauma' mortality analyses.
This explicitly links the specific predator mechanism to the exact statistical change in survivorship.
3
Analyze the solar subsidy and blue light arguments for vulnerabilities.
Identified that fossil fuel drops could stem from overall lower energy use, and blue light speed could stem from other factors in the room.
Ruling out alternative causes and utilizing control tests are two primary methods of strengthening causal arguments.
4
Match the solar and blue light arguments to their respective strengthening evidence.
Matched solar with the energy demand audit, and blue light with the color-neutralizing lenses experiment.
The energy audit rules out alternative economic causes, while the lens experiment isolates the visual frequency as the active variable.
5
Evaluate the anthropology argument regarding left-handed tools.
Matched it with the experimental replication evidence.
This bridges the gap by proving the unstated assumption that left-edge wear is physically dictated by left-handed use.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening causal arguments by ruling out alternative explanations, utilizing control groups to isolate variables, and confirming underlying mechanical linkages.
Soru 935Soru →

Macroeconomist: A national currency cannot achieve global reserve status unless its issuing central bank operates completely independent of short-term political pressures. Some analysts argue that the newly launched Solarian Credit will achieve global reserve status because it is backed by vast physical commodity reserves. However, any currency backed by vast physical commodity reserves inherently subjects its valuation to unpredictable global market fluctuations. Furthermore, no central bank can successfully prioritize long-term economic stability if its currency's valuation is subjected to such unpredictable market fluctuations. Therefore, the Solarian Credit cannot achieve global reserve status.

Which of the following, if assumed, enables the macroeconomist's conclusion to be properly drawn?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Any central bank that operates completely independent of short-term political pressures is able to successfully prioritize long-term economic stability.

Cevap

The statement that any central bank that operates completely independent of short-term political pressures is able to successfully prioritize long-term economic stability.
The macroeconomist's argument relies on a chain of formal logic that remains incomplete. To prove the Solarian Credit cannot achieve global reserve status, the first premise dictates we must prove it lacks independence from political pressure. The evidence provided only proves that the Solarian Credit's central bank cannot prioritize long-term economic stability (due to commodity backing causing market fluctuations). To bridge the gap, we must assume that an inability to prioritize long-term stability guarantees a lack of political independence. The correct answer states this exact rule in its contrapositive form: Any bank that IS independent MUST be able to prioritize long-term stability. If we add this rule, the Solarian Credit's inability to prioritize stability guarantees it lacks independence, which in turn guarantees it cannot achieve global reserve status.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Map the required condition for the conclusion.
The conclusion is that the Solarian Credit will not achieve global reserve status. According to the first premise, the only stated way to prove this is to prove that its central bank is NOT completely independent of short-term political pressures.
Establishing the endpoint of the logical chain needed to mathematically guarantee the conclusion.
2
Map the chain of established premises regarding the Solarian Credit.
Solarian Credit -> Backed by commodities -> Subjected to market fluctuations -> Cannot successfully prioritize long-term economic stability.
Determines the furthest point we can reach using the explicit evidence provided in the stimulus.
3
Identify the logical gap.
The explicit chain ends at 'Cannot prioritize long-term stability'. The required trigger to prove the conclusion is 'Not independent of political pressures'. Therefore, the missing link is: 'If a bank cannot prioritize long-term stability, it is not independent of political pressures.'
A sufficient assumption must perfectly connect the end of the premise chain to the trigger for the conclusion.
4
Formulate the contrapositive of the missing link to find the correct answer.
The contrapositive of 'If it cannot prioritize stability, it is not independent' is exactly: 'If a bank is independent of political pressures, it must be able to successfully prioritize long-term economic stability.'
LSAT questions frequently present the correct sufficient assumption in its contrapositive form to test advanced formal logic translation.

Anahtar Kavram

Sufficient Assumption (Conditional Logic Chains and Contrapositives)
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 936Soru →

Marine Biologist: The population of the reef-dwelling clown triggerfish has declined significantly over the past decade. Some conservationists attribute this to increased commercial fishing in the area. However, recent data shows that the population of predatory grouper, which primarily feed on juvenile clown triggerfish, has doubled during the same period. Since commercial fishing operations in this region primarily target tuna and completely ignore grouper, it is clear that the grouper population explosion, rather than commercial fishing, is responsible for the decline of the clown triggerfish.

Which of the following statements, if logically negated, would fatally undermine the marine biologist's conclusion? (Select all that apply)

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The methods used by commercial tuna fishers have not inadvertently eliminated the natural predators of the grouper.; The commercial fishing operations targeting tuna do not result in significant bycatch of clown triggerfish.

Cevap

The correct statements are the ones indicating that commercial tuna fishers have not eliminated the grouper's natural predators, and that commercial fishing operations do not result in significant bycatch of clown triggerfish.
The argument explicitly concludes that the grouper, rather than commercial fishing, is responsible for the decline. For this causal conclusion to hold, the author must assume that commercial fishing is not the hidden root cause of the grouper explosion itself, and that commercial fishing is not secretly depleting the triggerfish through untargeted bycatch. Negating these specific statements reveals scenarios where commercial fishing is ultimately to blame, thereby logically destroying the author's conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's core structure.
Conclusion: Grouper, rather than commercial fishing, is responsible for the decline. Premises: Grouper population doubled and they eat triggerfish; commercial fishing targets tuna and ignores grouper.
Understanding the precise causal claim (A caused the problem, not B) is necessary before evaluating assumptions.
2
Apply the Negation Technique to each option.
Mentally reverse the logical meaning of each statement to see how it impacts the argument when proven false.
A necessary assumption is one that, if proven false, causes the argument's conclusion to collapse.
3
Evaluate the negated statements against the conclusion.
Negating the correct options shows scenarios where commercial fishing is either the direct cause (bycatch) or the indirect root cause (eliminating grouper predators). Both scenarios destroy the conclusion.
If commercial fishing is the true cause, the conclusion that it is 'rather than commercial fishing' is fatally undermined.

Anahtar Kavram

Applying the Negation Technique to Causal Assumptions
Soru 937Soru →

To improve the durability of its flagship rugged smartphone, the Trekker, a telecommunications company analyzed thousands of broken units that customers had sent to the company's centralized repair facility over the past year. The engineers found that 85 percent of the damaged Trekkers had shattered outer screens, while only 5 percent had damaged internal processors. Based on this data, the engineering team proposed heavily reinforcing the screens on the next generation of the Trekker. However, the chief product architect rejected this proposal, arguing that if the goal is to maximize the average operational lifespan of the Trekker in the field, the company must instead prioritize reinforcing the internal processors.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy between the repair data and the architect's recommendation?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: When a Trekker's internal processor is damaged, the device typically becomes immediately inoperable and is discarded by the user, whereas units with shattered screens usually remain functional enough to justify the effort of returning them for repair.

Cevap

The statement explaining that devices with damaged processors are typically discarded, while those with shattered screens are returned for repair.
The correct answer provides a mechanism (survivorship bias) that perfectly reconciles the repair data with the architect's recommendation. If a damaged processor causes the user to instantly throw the phone away, those phones never make it to the repair facility to be counted. Conversely, a shattered screen leaves the phone functional enough to be mailed in. Therefore, the repair data vastly underestimates processor failures in the field. The architect realizes that to extend the phone's life, they must protect the component that causes total device death, not the one that merely results in a repair request.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the apparent discrepancy or paradox in the stimulus.
Repair data shows screens break 85% of the time and processors only 5%. Yet, the architect insists that reinforcing processors is the key to maximizing the phone's lifespan.
Resolving a paradox requires clearly defining the two conflicting facts that need to be reconciled.
2
Analyze the nature of the evidence provided.
The data only comes from 'units that customers had sent to the company's centralized repair facility'.
In LSAT Logical Reasoning, the source and scope of data are critical. If data only represents a specific subset (returned phones), it may not accurately reflect the whole picture (all broken phones in the field).
3
Evaluate the options to find a factual statement that explains how both sides of the paradox can be true simultaneously.
The correct answer must explain why processor damage is actually a massive threat to the phone's lifespan despite barely showing up in the repair facility's data.
A valid resolution must bridge the gap without contradicting either of the established facts.
4
Select the option that introduces a selection bias into the data pool.
The correct option reveals that phones with broken processors are thrown away (thus never counted in the 5%), while those with broken screens survive long enough to be mailed in (inflating the 85%).
This perfectly explains why the repair data is skewed and why the architect is correct to focus on the fatal flaw (the processor) to extend actual field lifespan.

Anahtar Kavram

Selection Bias and Representativeness in Paradoxes
Soru 938Soru →

Botanist: The rare *Silene* flower requires extended periods of freezing temperatures followed immediately by heavy rainfall in order to bloom. The university's climate-controlled greenhouse is incapable of simulating heavy rainfall and cannot reach freezing temperatures. Therefore, if our research team is to successfully observe the *Silene* flower's blooming phase, we will be forced to conduct our research in the Torngat Mountains, and we will need to drastically reduce our laboratory budget.

Which of the following statements function as supporter assumptions that are logically required for the botanist's conclusion to be properly drawn? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The Torngat Mountains are the only location available to the research team where the *Silene* flower can be exposed to the specific sequence of freezing temperatures and heavy rainfall.; Conducting field research in the Torngat Mountains entails costs that cannot be accommodated without drastically reducing the research team's laboratory budget.

Cevap

The statements that link the required weather conditions exclusively to the Torngat Mountains, and link the Torngat Mountains expedition to the necessary reduction of the laboratory budget.
The argument's conclusion introduces two entirely new elements that do not appear in the premises: a specific geographic location (the Torngat Mountains) and a financial consequence (drastically reducing the laboratory budget). For the conclusion to be logically drawn, two supporter assumptions are required. First, there must be a bridge connecting the required weather conditions to the Torngat Mountains (they must be the only available place with these conditions, otherwise the team isn't 'forced' to go there). Second, there must be a bridge connecting the expedition to the financial consequence (the trip must cause the budget reduction, otherwise the reduction isn't strictly necessary).

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the core premises of the argument.
Premise 1: Blooming requires freezing + heavy rain. Premise 2: The greenhouse cannot provide freezing or heavy rain.
Understanding the established facts is necessary before identifying what is missing.
2
Identify the main conclusion.
Conclusion: To observe the bloom, the team MUST go to the Torngat Mountains AND MUST drastically reduce the laboratory budget.
The conclusion contains the 'rogue' elements that the supporter assumptions must bridge.
3
Locate the logical gaps between the premises and the conclusion.
Gap 1: Moving from 'need specific weather' to 'must go to Torngat Mountains'. Gap 2: Moving from 'going to Torngat Mountains' to 'must reduce laboratory budget'.
Supporter assumptions function by explicitly connecting new conclusion concepts back to the established premise framework.
4
Apply the Negation Test to potential assumptions to verify they are strictly required.
Negating Gap 1 ('Torngat is NOT the only available location') destroys the claim that they are forced to go there. Negating Gap 2 ('The trip does NOT require reducing the budget') destroys the claim that they must reduce the budget.
The Negation Test definitively separates logically required assumptions from statements that merely strengthen the argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions in Compound Conclusions
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 939Soru →

A new allergy medication, AllerClear, contains the exact same active compound as the leading brand, AllerSustain. However, AllerClear's unique formulation causes it to be metabolized and completely eliminated from the human body twice as rapidly as AllerSustain. Since the adverse side effects of this active compound are known to result from its presence in the bloodstream, researchers predicted that allergy sufferers would experience far fewer side effects with AllerClear. Yet, in a multi-month clinical trial where participants were instructed to take their assigned medication whenever their allergy symptoms flared up, those using AllerClear reported a significantly higher incidence of side effects than those using AllerSustain.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Due to its rapid elimination, AllerClear provides only brief relief, causing participants to take the medication so frequently that their total cumulative exposure to the active compound far exceeds that of AllerSustain users.

Cevap

The statement explaining that rapid elimination leads to brief relief, which causes participants to take the medication more frequently and results in a higher total cumulative exposure.
The discrepancy arises because a medication designed to leave the body quickly (which was expected to reduce side effects) actually resulted in a higher incidence of side effects. The correct answer resolves this by introducing an unintended behavioral shift: because the drug leaves the body quickly, its therapeutic effects wear off rapidly. This prompts patients to take the medication much more frequently. Consequently, their total cumulative exposure to the active compound ends up being significantly higher than that of patients taking the slower-acting drug, perfectly explaining the higher incidence of side effects.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the two conflicting facts presented in the stimulus.
Fact 1: AllerClear is eliminated twice as fast as AllerSustain, leading researchers to expect fewer side effects. Fact 2: Trial participants using AllerClear experienced a significantly higher rate of side effects.
Isolating the exact nature of the discrepancy is required before evaluating how to resolve it.
2
Determine the underlying assumption that makes the outcome surprising.
The researchers assumed that a faster elimination rate per dose would automatically result in less overall exposure to the active compound.
Identifying the gap in the researchers' reasoning helps predict the mechanism of a valid resolution.
3
Evaluate the options for a statement that bridges the gap without contradicting the premises.
The correct option reveals an unintended behavioral consequence: the fast elimination necessitates more frequent dosing. This frequency completely overrides the benefit of fast elimination, leading to higher total exposure.
A valid resolution must actively reconcile the two conflicting facts, showing how the expected cause (fast elimination) led to the unexpected outcome (more side effects).

Anahtar Kavram

Resolving paradoxes involving unintended behavioral consequences and the distinction between rate of elimination and total absolute volume.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 940Soru →

City Planner: To address the severe budget deficit in the municipal transportation department, we must immediately reduce the frequency of bus services on all major routes. The transit union has proposed an alternative: increasing the city's general sales tax to subsidize the department. However, macroeconomic data clearly demonstrates that any increase in the sales tax at this time would suppress local retail spending, which the city relies on for its baseline revenue. Since we cannot afford to suppress retail spending, the drastic cuts to bus service frequencies must be implemented.

The reasoning in the city planner's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it does which one of the following?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: overlooks the possibility that there are ways to resolve the budget deficit other than the transit union's proposal and reducing bus services

Cevap

The argument is flawed because it overlooks the possibility that there are ways to resolve the budget deficit other than the transit union's proposal and reducing bus services.
The city planner argues that because one specific alternative to cutting bus services (increasing the sales tax) is unviable, the city must cut bus services. This argument is a classic false dilemma. It assumes without justification that there are only two possible solutions to the budget deficit: reducing bus services or increasing the general sales tax. By eliminating the tax increase, the planner concludes that service cuts are mandatory, completely ignoring other potential solutions (e.g., increasing bus fares, securing federal grants, or implementing a targeted transit tax). The correct answer accurately identifies this failure to consider other alternatives.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the structure of the city planner's argument.
The argument sets up a scenario to address a budget deficit, rejects one alternative (a sales tax increase), and concludes that the original plan (bus service cuts) must be adopted.
Understanding the argument's premises and conclusion is strictly necessary to evaluate its logical validity.
2
Identify the logical gap or flaw in the reasoning.
The planner concludes that bus service cuts are strictly necessary simply because one specific alternative is unviable.
This structural pattern reveals a reliance on an unstated assumption.
3
Characterize the unstated assumption.
The argument assumes that cutting bus services and raising the sales tax are the absolute only two possible ways to address the transportation budget deficit.
If other alternatives existed, rejecting the sales tax increase would not prove that bus service cuts are mandatory.
4
Select the option that accurately describes this flaw.
The correct option points out that the argument overlooks other possible solutions to the deficit.
This accurately defines the False Dilemma (or False Dichotomy) fallacy committed in the stimulus.

Anahtar Kavram

False Dilemma (False Dichotomy)
ÖncekiSayfa 47 / 198Sonraki
Tüm alıştırma soruları — LSAT | Examkin