Examkin

Eliminating Paradox-Deepening Traps

9 soru

Tüm türler9Çoktan seçmeli5Doğru / Yanlış2Eşleştirme2
Soru 1Soru →

To promote water conservation, the city of Aethelgard replaced its traditional single-rate water billing—where residents paid a constant price for every gallon used—with a tiered system. Under the new system, a severe financial surcharge is added to the price of any residential water used beyond a newly established "conservation threshold." In the first year under this new system, despite a stable population and normal weather patterns, total residential water consumption in Aethelgard increased by 20 percent.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The conservation threshold was set significantly higher than the city’s historical average for household usage, and the base price for water consumed below this threshold was drastically reduced from the old single rate.

Cevap

The statement explaining that the threshold was set higher than average and the price for water below the threshold was reduced.
The correct answer reconciles the discrepancy by explaining the economic incentive created by the new policy. If the threshold was generous (above average usage) and the cost of water below that threshold was significantly lowered, most residents experienced a price decrease for their marginal water consumption. This lower price incentivized them to use more water up to the threshold, thereby driving up the total residential water consumption despite the penalties that existed for extreme overuse.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the components of the paradox.
A policy designed to reduce residential water usage (by imposing a severe surcharge on excess use) paradoxically resulted in a 20% increase in total residential usage, despite stable population and weather.
Clearly defining the conflicting premises is required before evaluating how an answer choice bridges the gap.
2
Determine the criteria for a correct resolution.
The correct answer must introduce a new fact that explains how the tiered system itself inadvertently incentivized an overall increase in water use.
A true resolution must account for both the existence of the penalty and the subsequent rise in consumption.
3
Evaluate the options for Paradox-Deepening Traps.
Eliminate the option regarding 'widespread anxiety' over the punitive surcharge, as extreme fear of the penalty would lead to less water usage, making the 20% increase even more baffling.
Recognizing options that exacerbate the discrepancy is a core skill in resolving paradoxes.
4
Select the option that provides a complete mechanical resolution.
Select the option indicating a lowered base rate and high threshold.
By lowering the cost for the majority of water consumed, the city accidentally created a financial incentive for the average resident to use more water than before, perfectly explaining the overall increase.

Anahtar Kavram

Resolving a paradox requires introducing a premise that allows both sides of the seemingly contradictory stimulus to coexist naturally, while carefully avoiding traps that make the conflict worse.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 2Soru →

Consider the following situation: One year ago, the municipal government of Meridia halved the frequency of its residential garbage pickup, expecting this reduction in service to yield substantial financial savings. Surprisingly, the latest fiscal audit revealed that Meridia's overall expenditures for residential garbage collection have risen by 15% since the new schedule was implemented.

Evaluate the three statements provided and match each to its logical impact on the discrepancy described above.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Because garbage accumulated for an entire week, the heavier loads caused collection routes to take significantly longer, forcing the municipality to pay its sanitation workers substantial overtime.
Shortly after the schedule change, the municipality replaced its aging garbage trucks with a new fleet that is highly fuel-efficient and requires very little maintenance.
Meridia's recycling program, which operates under a completely separate budget funded by a federal grant, also saw a reduction in pickup frequency.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The statement regarding overtime pay resolves the discrepancy. The statement regarding fuel-efficient trucks deepens the discrepancy. The statement regarding the recycling program is irrelevant.
The correct matching properly identifies the logical function of each statement: the overtime statement explains the unexpected cost increase (Resolves), the efficient-trucks statement provides a reason costs should have dropped further (Deepens), and the recycling statement discusses a separate budget (Irrelevant).

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the two conflicting premises in the stimulus.
Premise 1: Collection frequency was halved to save money. Premise 2: Total collection expenditures actually increased by 15%.
Understanding the exact nature of the conflict is required to evaluate how new information impacts the scenario.
2
Evaluate the statement about overtime pay.
It introduces a mechanism (overtime wages due to heavy loads) that drove costs up despite the reduced number of pickups, bridging the two premises.
A resolving statement must show how the expected outcome (savings) was thwarted by an unexpected factor.
3
Evaluate the statement about new, fuel-efficient trucks.
It introduces a factor that would further lower costs, making the 15% increase even more inexplicable.
A paradox-deepening trap exacerbates the conflict between the original premises rather than bridging them.
4
Evaluate the statement about the recycling program.
It has zero effect on the paradox because it is explicitly funded by a separate grant and budget.
Statements relying on outside scope or explicitly walled-off parameters do not impact the core argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Eliminating Paradox-Deepening Traps
Soru 3Soru →

In Kaelen, the government recently provided a massive subsidy for farmers to purchase high-yield seed varieties. The stated goal was to increase overall crop production in order to lower retail food prices for residents. One year later, agricultural reports confirmed that total crop production in Kaelen had indeed reached record highs, and overall consumer demand for food remained constant. Nevertheless, the average retail price of food in Kaelen increased significantly over that same period.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent paradox described above?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The unprecedented volume of harvested crops overwhelmed Kaelen’s limited processing and storage facilities, resulting in massive spoilage that left the retail market with less sellable food than in previous years.

Cevap

The statement explaining that an unprecedented harvest overwhelmed facilities and caused massive spoilage, resulting in less sellable food.
The correct answer resolves the paradox by demonstrating that while initial crop production (the harvest) increased, a severe bottleneck in processing and storage caused massive spoilage. This means the actual supply of sellable food reaching the consumer market decreased. With a lower sellable supply and constant demand, the significant increase in retail food prices is perfectly logically explained, successfully bridging both facts presented in the stimulus.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the two seemingly conflicting facts in the stimulus.
Fact 1: Crop production reached record highs (supply increased) while demand remained constant. Fact 2: Retail food prices increased significantly.
Resolving a paradox requires clearly defining the discrepancy that needs to be logically bridged.
2
Determine the logically expected outcome based on the first fact.
Normally, an increase in agricultural production (supply) alongside constant demand should logically lead to a decrease or stabilization in retail prices.
Understanding the expected relationship highlights exactly why the actual outcome (a price increase) is surprising and requires a specific intervening cause.
3
Evaluate the options to find a statement that allows both facts to coexist without contradiction.
The correct option reveals that while 'harvested' production was high, the actual 'sellable' supply decreased due to spoilage, which perfectly explains the subsequent price increase.
A valid resolution must actively explain how the specific surprising outcome occurred despite the initial conditions, without contradicting the provided facts.

Anahtar Kavram

Eliminating Paradox-Deepening Traps and Resolving Discrepancies
Soru 4Soru →

Read the following scenario and the apparent paradox it presents.

Scenario: A regional agricultural department introduced a new species of insect, the Alerian wasp, to prey on aphids that were severely damaging local apple orchards. One year after the introduction of the wasps, biologists confirmed that the aphid population in the orchards had plummeted by over 80 percent. Paradoxically, the total yield of apples harvested from the orchards this year is significantly lower than it was during the height of the aphid infestation.

Match each of the following candidate statements to its logical effect on the paradox.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Upon depleting their primary food source of aphids, Alerian wasps survive by aggressively consuming the blossoms of apple trees before the fruit can develop.
The apple trees planted in these specific orchards were selectively bred to be exceptionally resilient against adverse weather conditions and non-aphid fungal diseases.
A neighboring agricultural zone, which predominantly grows pears and peaches rather than apples, chose not to introduce the Alerian wasp to its fields.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The statement about wasps consuming blossoms resolves the paradox. The statement about trees being resilient to other diseases deepens the paradox. The statement about the neighboring region is irrelevant.
The correct mapping identifies the specific logical role each statement plays. The blossom-consuming wasp statement acts as a bridge, showing how a solution to one problem directly caused another. The resilience statement serves as a paradox-deepening trap because eliminating alternative causes for the low yield makes the low yield more inexplicable. The neighboring region statement is purely out of scope.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the stimulus to isolate the two conflicting facts.
Fact 1: Aphid populations dropped by 80% (which should help the apples). Fact 2: Apple yields dropped significantly.
Accurate identification of the discrepancy is required before you can evaluate the logical impact of new information.
2
Evaluate the logical impact of the statement regarding wasps consuming blossoms.
It provides a new causal mechanism showing that the wasps themselves destroy the crop.
Because it bridges both facts (explaining the drop in aphids and the drop in apples), it Resolves the Paradox.
3
Evaluate the logical impact of the statement regarding the apple trees' resilience to weather and fungus.
It eliminates alternative explanations for the crop failure.
By ruling out other reasons the crop might have failed, the low yield becomes even more mysterious. Therefore, this Deepens the Paradox.
4
Evaluate the logical impact of the statement regarding the neighboring region's pears and peaches.
It introduces outside information with no causal link to the orchards in question.
Since it does not affect the local apple yield, it is Irrelevant to the Paradox.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating the logical function of new information on an apparent discrepancy (Resolving, Deepening, or Irrelevant).
Soru 5Soru →

The city recently replaced all traditional toll booths on the busy cross-town bridge with a high-speed electronic tolling system, which allows cars to pass without slowing down. Interestingly, even though the total number of cars using the bridge daily has not increased, the average time it takes a vehicle to cross the bridge during rush hour has actually increased since the new system was installed.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: By eliminating the staggered pacing previously created by vehicles stopping at the toll booths, the new system causes cars to arrive simultaneously at a narrow two-lane tunnel immediately following the bridge, resulting in severe gridlock.

Cevap

The correct answer explains that the elimination of staggered pacing at the toll booths causes cars to hit a downstream bottleneck (the narrow tunnel) all at once, creating gridlock.
The correct answer resolves the paradox by explaining an unintended consequence of the faster tolling system. Without the toll booths acting as a pacing mechanism, the simultaneous influx of vehicles creates a severe bottleneck at the narrow tunnel just past the bridge. This perfectly explains how the crossing time could increase despite the faster toll system and flat traffic volume.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the apparent discrepancy in the stimulus.
The paradox: A high-speed tolling system was installed and traffic volume remained flat, yet the average time to cross the bridge during rush hour increased.
Understanding the two conflicting facts is required to identify the missing information that reconciles them.
2
Evaluate the options to find a mechanism that bridges the conflicting facts.
The correct answer must show how faster toll processing directly leads to a slower overall crossing time, without contradicting the premises.
A valid resolution introduces a new, unstated fact that allows both premises of the paradox to be true simultaneously.
3
Eliminate paradox-deepening traps and irrelevant statements.
Options explaining how the system is faster or how billing works fail to explain the slow down and are eliminated.
Wrong answers in this question type often make the discrepancy more confusing or focus on irrelevant aspects of the scenario.

Anahtar Kavram

Eliminating Paradox-Deepening Traps
Soru 6Soru →

A large pharmaceutical company implemented a strict new policy prohibiting its sales representatives from offering any gifts, meals, or financial incentives to physicians. The stated goal was to ensure that physicians prescribe the company's medications based solely on clinical merit. However, in the year following the policy's implementation, the company experienced a 25% increase in the prescription rate of its newest, highest-margin medication, even though independent clinical trials demonstrated it to be no more effective than older, significantly cheaper alternatives.

Statement: The apparent discrepancy described above is successfully resolved by the new information that, following the implementation of the policy, competing pharmaceutical companies significantly increased the value and frequency of the financial incentives they offered to the exact same demographic of physicians.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: False

Cevap

False
The candidate statement provides a classic paradox-deepening trap. If competitors are offering more incentives while the primary company offers none, the standard expectation is that the primary company would lose market share. The fact that the primary company's prescriptions increased by 25% despite this aggressive competitor behavior makes the situation even more puzzling. A valid resolution must explain why the prescriptions increased; this statement merely provides a compelling reason why they should have decreased.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the apparent discrepancy presented in the stimulus.
The paradox: A company stopped offering financial incentives, and its drug is no better but more expensive than alternatives. Yet, the prescription rate for this drug inexplicably increased by 25%.
Understanding the baseline conflict is required before evaluating any potential resolution.
2
Determine the logical expectation if the candidate statement were true.
If competitors significantly increased their financial incentives to the same physicians, the logical expectation is that those physicians would favor the competitors' drugs, leading to a decrease in sales for the company that stopped offering incentives.
Tracing the causal direction of the new information determines its effect on the original paradox.
3
Compare the logical expectation to the actual outcome in the stimulus.
The logical expectation (decreased prescriptions) directly contradicts the actual outcome in the stimulus (a 25% increase in prescriptions).
This comparison reveals whether the candidate statement bridges the gap or widens it.
4
Classify the statement's effect on the paradox.
Because the statement introduces a factor that should have caused the exact opposite of the observed outcome, it is a paradox-deepening trap. Therefore, the claim that it resolves the discrepancy is false.
A statement that exacerbates the contradiction cannot be the correct resolution.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying paradox-deepening traps by evaluating the causal direction of introduced variables.
Soru 7Soru →

To combat rising traffic congestion in its downtown business district, the city of Oakhaven recently doubled the frequency of its public bus service and reduced fares. Within three months, city officials noted that the total number of passenger cars entering the downtown district daily had decreased by 30 percent, as many commuters switched to taking the bus. Nevertheless, the average time it takes a vehicle to cross the downtown district during rush hour has significantly increased over the same period.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The transit authority accommodated the doubled bus frequency by deploying a fleet of articulated buses that are much longer than standard buses and frequently block multiple lanes at intersections.

Cevap

The transit authority accommodated the doubled bus frequency by deploying a fleet of articulated buses that are much longer than standard buses and frequently block multiple lanes at intersections.
This option introduces a new factor—the disruptive size and turning radius of the new articulated buses—that completely explains why traffic has slowed down. Even though there are fewer passenger cars, the new buses cause massive bottlenecks that increase the average travel time for all vehicles, smoothly reconciling both facts.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the two apparently conflicting facts in the stimulus.
Fact 1: The number of passenger cars entering downtown decreased by 30 percent. Fact 2: The average time to cross the downtown district by vehicle significantly increased.
Resolving a paradox requires precisely understanding the two sides of the discrepancy.
2
Determine what the correct answer must accomplish.
The correct answer must explain how traffic delays could increase despite a massive 30 percent reduction in passenger cars.
A valid resolution must actively bridge the gap between the two conflicting facts without contradicting either one.
3
Evaluate the options to find the one that resolves the discrepancy while actively eliminating options that deepen it.
The correct option shows that the new buses themselves are causing severe bottlenecks, explaining the increased travel time despite fewer cars. Options that remove even more traffic from the road must be eliminated as they deepen the paradox.
This provides a new causal mechanism (bus size and lane blocking) that overrides the expected benefit of having fewer cars.

Anahtar Kavram

Resolving a paradox requires finding a new piece of information that allows both seemingly contradictory premises to be true simultaneously, while actively avoiding trap choices that would make the premises even harder to reconcile.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 8Soru →

Over the last six months, Apex Delivery Company replaced its manual sorting facility with a new automated system that processes packages 50% faster. Surprisingly, despite this significant improvement in sorting speed, the company's average delivery time per package has increased during this same period.

Statement: The apparent paradox described above would be deepened if it were discovered that Apex recently hired a large fleet of new delivery drivers and optimized its delivery routes, significantly reducing the transit time from the sorting facility to the customer.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True
The correct answer is True because the paradox is based on delivery times increasing despite faster sorting. If transit times were also reduced by hiring more drivers, then both major phases of delivery became faster. This makes the overall increase in delivery time even more inexplicable, actively deepening the paradox.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the two conflicting facts that create the apparent paradox.
Fact 1: Sorting speed increased by 50%. Fact 2: Overall average delivery time per package increased.
Understanding the discrepancy is necessary before evaluating how new information affects it.
2
Determine the criteria for a fact to deepen the paradox.
A fact deepens the paradox if it provides another reason why the unexpected outcome (increased delivery time) should NOT have happened.
This establishes a framework for evaluating the provided statement.
3
Analyze the effect of the new information provided in the statement.
The new information states that transit times were significantly reduced due to more drivers and optimized routes.
We must evaluate how this new premise interacts with the original conflicting facts.
4
Conclude whether the new information resolves or deepens the paradox.
Since both sorting and transit are now faster, an overall increase in delivery time makes even less sense. Therefore, the new information deepens the paradox.
This confirms that the statement provided in the stem is logically true.

Anahtar Kavram

Eliminating Paradox-Deepening Traps
Tahmini Süre:1m 0s
Soru 9Soru →

During the late Bronze Age, the city-state of Olaria experienced a massive, decade-long drought that decimated its local agricultural output, which was heavily dependent on rainfall. Historical records confirm a severe shortage of domestically grown grain during this time. Yet, archaeological excavations of Olarian households from this period reveal that the average citizen consumed significantly more grain than in the agriculturally prosperous decades preceding the drought.

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

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: During the drought, Olaria's rulers suspended heavy tariffs on food imports, making foreign grain from distant, unaffected empires much cheaper and more abundant than locally grown grain had ever been.

Cevap

The statement regarding the suspension of tariffs on food imports, which made foreign grain cheaper and more abundant.
The correct answer resolves the discrepancy by introducing a new, external source of grain. Even though local production was decimated by the drought, the suspension of import tariffs made foreign grain cheaper and more abundant than local grain had ever been. This logically explains how the average citizen could afford and consume more grain despite the massive local agricultural shortage.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the apparent discrepancy in the stimulus.
Local grain production was severely shortened by a drought, but the average citizen consumed more grain than they did during prosperous times.
Understanding the two conflicting facts is the first mandatory step in finding a logical resolution.
2
Determine what is required to successfully resolve the paradox.
The correct answer must explain where the extra grain came from despite the severe local crop failure.
A valid resolution must fully account for both the increased consumption and the local agricultural collapse.
3
Evaluate the choices to find the one that reconciles both facts.
The statement about suspended tariffs introduces a new, highly affordable source of grain via imports, explaining how consumption could increase despite local crop failures.
This completely bridges the gap between local shortage and increased consumption without violating any established premises.
4
Actively eliminate paradox-deepening traps and one-sided explanations.
The choice about river trade routes being cut off is eliminated because it deepens the paradox by removing a potential source of imported grain. The choice about fruit failure is eliminated because it only explains the demand side.
An answer that makes the conflicting facts harder to reconcile is a trap, as is an answer that ignores half of the discrepancy.

Anahtar Kavram

To resolve a paradox, the correct answer must provide new information that allows both seemingly conflicting facts to coexist simultaneously without contradicting either one.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Eliminating Paradox-Deepening Traps Alıştırma Soruları — LSAT | Examkin