LSAC LSAT-TEST Online Practice Questions and Exam Preparation

LSAC LSAT-TEST Online Questions & Answers

• Question 221:

  Thurgood Marshall's litigation of Brown v. Board of Education in 1952 ?the landmark case, decided in 1954, that made segregation illegal in United States public schools ?-was not his first case before the U.S. Supreme Court. Some legal scholars claim that the cases he presented to the court in the sixteen years before his successful argument for desegregation of public schools were necessary forerunners of that case: preliminary tests of legal strategies and early erosions of the foundations of discrimination against African Americans that paved the way for success in Brown.

  When Marshall joined the legal staff of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in 1936, the organization was divided on how to proceed against the legal doctrine that for forty years had promoted "separate but equal" facilities for African Americans in educational institutions, in public transportation, and various other civic amenities. One approach was to emphasize that facilities were not in fact equal and to pursue litigation whose practical goal was the improvement both of opportunity for African Americans and of the facilities themselves. A second, more theoretical, approach was to argue that the concept of separate but equal facilities for the races was by its very nature impossible to fulfill, rendering the doctrine self-contradictory and hence legally unsound. Marshall correctly believed that the latter approach would eventually be the one to bring repeal of the doctrine, but felt it necessary in the short term to argue several cases using the former approach, in order to demonstrate the numerous ways in which segregation prevented real equality and thus to prepare the courts to recognize the validity of the theoretical argument.

  While Marshall enjoyed several successes arguing for the equalization of facilities and opportunities in such areas as voting practices and accommodations for graduate students at public universities, it would be twelve years before he evolved a strategy for arguing against pervasive discriminatory practices that enabled him to make the leap from individual instances of inequality to the broader social argument needed to later invalidate "separate but equal." In 1948, Marshall litigated Shelley v. Kraemer, in which he convinced the court to outlaw housing discrimination practiced by private parties. Although the court had previously supported such practices implicitly under a doctrine that excused private dealings from the legal requirement for equal protection of citizens under law, Marshall presented sociological data demonstrating that, in sum and over time, these individual transactions constituted a pattern of insupportable discrimination. Marshall later used this strategy when arguing against individual schools' enrollment restrictions in Brown; scholars argue that his successful use of the strategy in Shelley prepared the court to accept such data as convincing evidence for finding "separate but equal" insupportable on its face.

  It can most reasonably be inferred from the passage that Marshall's legal strategy for attacking the "separate but equal" doctrine

  A. sought to answer critics within the NAACP
  B. suggested Marshall thought the court would never accept the validity of a theoretical argument
  C. satisfied the requirement that cases first be argued in lower court
  D. presumed that the court could only gradually be convinced to overturn the "separate but equal" doctrine
  E. reflected Marshall's preference to seek practical goals
  D. presumed that the court could only gradually be convinced to overturn the "separate but equal" doctrine

  ---

  The first five words of the question stem clearly scream "Inference," and we need to remember that an inference may stem from several parts of the passage, or from a careful paraphrase of a single reference. The latter is really the case here. Marshall's legal strategy against the "separate but equal" policy is discussed at the end of 2; he felt that it would be "necessary in the short term" to argue against individual injustices ?a clear implication that time would be needed for the argument against "separate but equal" itself to prevail "eventually." This "short term/eventually" contrast supports reference of option [presumed that the court could only gradually...] to the idea of overturning the policy slowly.

• Question 222:

  Experts anticipate that global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) will have-doubled by the end of the twenty-first century. It is known that CO2 can contribute to global warming by trapping solar energy that is being reradiated as heat from the Earth's surface. However, some research has suggested that elevated CO2 levels could enhance the photosynthetic rates of plants, resulting in a lush world of agricultural abundance, and that this CO2 fertilization effect might eventually decrease the rate of global warming. The increased vegetation in such an environment could be counted on to draw more CO, from the atmosphere. The level of CO2 would thus increase at a lower rate than many experts have predicted.

  However, while a number of recent studies confirm that plant growth would be generally enhanced in an atmosphere rich in CO2, they also suggest that increased CO2 would differentially increase the growth rate of different species of plants, which could eventually result in decreased agricultural yields. Certain important crops such as corn and sugarcane that currently have higher photosynthetic efficiencies than other plants may lose that edge in an atmosphere rich in CO2. Patterson and Flint have shown that these important crops may experience yield reductions because of the increased performance of certain weeds. Such differences in growth rates between plant species could also alter ecosystem stability. Studies have shown that within rangeland regions, for example, a weedy grass grows much better with plentiful CO2 than do three other grasses. Because this weedy grass predisposes land to burning, its potential increase may lead to greater numbers of and more severe wildfires in future rangeland communities.

  It is clear that the CO2 fertilization effect does not guarantee the lush world of agricultural abundance that once seemed likely, but what about the potential for the increased uptake of CO2 to decrease the rate of global warming? Some studies suggest that the changes accompanying global warming will not improve the ability of terrestrial ecosystems to absorb CO2. Billings' simulation of global warming conditions in wet tundra grasslands showed that the level of CO2 actually increased. Plant growth did increase under these conditions because of warmer temperatures and increased CO2 levels. But as the permafrost melted, more peat {accumulated dead plant material) began to decompose. This process in turn liberated more CO2 to the atmosphere. Billings estimated that if summer temperatures rose four degrees Celsius, the tundra would liberate 50 percent more CO2 than it does currently. In a warmer world, increased plant growth, which could absorb CO2 from the atmosphere, would not compensate for this rapid increase in decomposition rates. This observation is particularly important because high-latitude habitats such as the tundra are expected to experience the greatest temperature increase.

  The passage suggests that Patterson and Flint would be most likely to agree with which one of the following statements about increased levels of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere?

  A. They will not increase the growth rates of most species of plants.
  B. They will inhibit the growth of most crops, thus causing substantial decreases in agricultural yields.
  C. They are unlikely to increase the growth rates of plants with lower photosynthetic efficiencies.
  D. They will increase the growth rates of certain species of plants more than the growth rates of other species of plants.
  E. They will not affect the photosynthetic rates of plants that currently have the highest photosynthetic efficiencies.
  D. They will increase the growth rates of certain species of plants more than the growth rates of other species of plants.

  ---

  D is a straightforward inference from where Patterson and Flint come in. Certain crops (corn, sugarcane) "may experience yield reductions...because of the increased performance of certain weeds."

• Question 223:

  It is not good for a university to have class sizes that are very large or very small, or to have professors with teaching loads that are very light or very heavy. After all, crowded classes and overworked faculty cripple the institution's ability to recruit and retain both qualified students and faculty.

  Which one of the following, if added as a premise to the argument, most helps to justify its conclusion?

  A. Professors who have very light teaching loads tend to focus their remaining time on research.
  B. Classes that have very low numbers of students tend to have a lot of classroom discussion.
  C. Very small class sizes or very light teaching loads indicate incompetence in classroom instruction.
  D. Very small class sizes or very light teaching loads are common in the worst and the best universities.
  E. Professors with very light teaching loads have no more office hours for students than professors with normal teaching loads.
  C. Very small class sizes or very light teaching loads indicate incompetence in classroom instruction.

  ---

  This Strengthen question stem takes a strange form. As with any Strengthen/Weaken question, we must first identify the evidence and conclusion. The conclusion is the entire first sentence and can be considered as four separate

  conclusions:

  1) Very large classes are bad for a university.

  2) Very small classes are bad for a university.

  3) Very light teaching loads are bad for a university.

  4) Very heavy teaching loads are bad for a university.

  The evidence, however, only relates to points (1) and (4). We should therefore expect the correct answer to address points (2) and/or (3). Choice C., in shoring up the argument, explains the problem with small classes and light teaching

  loads, points (2) and (3).

• Question 224:

  In a school function ceremony, seven students, Amy, Bob, Chad, Dom, Elisa, Fischer, and Grant have to deliver their performances in seven consecutive slots, not necessarily in the order of their given names. The following information is known about the order in which the students perform: Chad performs immediately before Dom Grant performs sometime after Chad There are exactly two performances made between the performances of Amy and Elisa

  If Bob and Fischer dislike one another and want to perform as far away from each other as possible, who could be the first two performers respectively?

  I. Amy and Bob

  II. Fischer and Amy

  III.

  Bob and Amy

  A. Only I
  B. Only II
  C. Only III
  D. Both I and II
  E. Both II and III
  I. Amy and Bob II. Fischer and Amy III. Bob and Amy
  E. Both II and III

  ---

  The question says that Bob and Fischer should be as far apart as possible. Thus, we would ideally like to keep Bob and Fischer at the 1st and 7th slots, in any order. Thus, we have: Case I:

  

  Case II:

  

  Thus, we would try out the options where B and F are either in the 1st or the 7th slot. If such a scenario fails to give an agreeable solution, only then we would look at other possibilities.

  Statement I: This puts B in 2nd slot, hence we would keep it aside for the time being.

  Statement II: This puts F in the 1st slot. Hence, we would explore this further. The option also puts A in 2nd slot. Thus, we have, from Case II:

  

  Note: Since A is in the 2nd slot, E is 5th, C and D, being consecutive must be 3rd and 4th, and G must be in the only position left, i.e. 6th.

  This clearly satisfies all the conditions.

  Statement III: This also puts B in the 1st slot. Hence, we explore this option too. Using Case I, we have:

  

  Note: since A is 2nd, E is 5th; hence C and D are 3rd and 4th, and G is 6th. Thus, this option also satisfies all conditions General Let us denote the seven slots using the numbers 1 through 7 as shown below:

  

  We need to fill in the names of the performers in each slot depending on the information provided.

  Let us name the performers Amy, Bob, Chad, Dom, Elisa, Fischer, and Grant as A, B, C, D, E, F and G.

  Let us look at the information given in the question stem and see what we have got:

  1.

  Since Chad performs immediately before Dom, we can write "CD" as an element implying that there is no one else performing between them.

  2.

  Since Grant performs sometime after Chad, and Chad and Dom are consecutive performers, Grant must perform after Dom as well. Thus, we can represent the information as shown below:

  The "..." above implies that there could be none or at least 1 performer between D and G.

  3.

  There are exactly two performers between Amy and Elisa. This information can be represented as shown below:

  

  

  Thus, we see that the above information is NOT sufficient to assign even one of the performers to his/her corresponding slot number. This implies that there would possibly be multiple solutions to the arrangements of the performers. Thus, in order to solve the questions, we would need to use the information given in the questions.

• Question 225:

  During the recent economic downturn, banks contributed to the decline by loaning less money. Prior to the downturn, regulatory standards for loan making by banks were tightened. Clearly, therefore, banks will lend more money if those standards are relaxed.

  The argument assumes that

  A. the downturn did not cause a significant decrease in the total amount of money on deposit with banks which is the source of funds for banks to lend
  B. the imposition of the tighter regulatory standards was not a cause of the economic downturn
  C. the reason for tightening the regulatory standards was not arbitrary
  D. no economic downturn is accompanied by a significant decrease in the amount of money loaned out by banks to individual borrowers and to businesses
  E. no relaxation of standards for loan making by banks would compensate for the effects of the downturn
  A. the downturn did not cause a significant decrease in the total amount of money on deposit with banks which is the source of funds for banks to lend

  ---

  This is a pretty straightforward example of a causal argument. The conclusion is that banks will lend more money if regulatory standards are relaxed. The evidence for this is that before the downturn, the standards were tightened. In other words, according to this author, the tightening of the standards is what caused the banks to loan less money. And remember, one of the assumptions inherent in a causal argument is that no other factor caused the result in question, in this case, loaning less money. And that's the assumption that correct answer [the downturn did not cause a...] identifies -- it rules out an alternative explanation, namely that the downturn itself, not the regulations, caused the banks to have less money to lend.

• Question 226:

  You do not succeed unless you take a gamble. Gambling is foolish. Therefore, only fools succeed. Which one of the following would weaken the conclusion the most?

  A. Most fools gamble.
  B. Most fools do not succeed.
  C. Some succeed without gambling.
  D. Most successful gamblers are not foolish.
  E. A fool and his money are soon parted.
  C. Some succeed without gambling.

• Question 227:

  Five racing drivers, Alan, Bob, Chris, Don, and Eugene, enter into a contest that consists of 6 races. The results of all six races are listed below: Bob always finishes ahead of Chris. Alan finishes either first or last. Eugene finishes either first or last. There are no ties in any race. Every driver finishes each race. In each race, two points are awarded for a fifth place finish, four points for fourth, six points for third, eight points for second, and ten points for first.

  If Alan finishes first in four races, which of the following could earn a total of fewer than 26 points in the six races?

  A. Bob only.
  B. Chris only.
  C. Don only.
  D. Eugene of Chris.
  E. Don or Chris.
  E. Don or Chris.

  ---

  Eugene could only have a minimum of 28 points, since it will have four fifth-place and two first-place finishes. Bob could only have a minimum of 36 points. Either Chris or Don could finish fourth in all six races, for a total of 24 points.

• Question 228:

  The village of Vestmannaeyjar, in the far northern country of Iceland, is as bright and clean and up-to-date as any American or Canadian suburb. It is located on the island of Heimaey, just off the mainland. One January night in 1973, however, householders were shocked from their sleep. In some backyards red-hot liquid was spurting from the ground. Flaming "skyrockets" shot up and over the houses. The island's volcano, Helgafell, silent for seven thousand years, was violently erupting! Luckily, the island's fishing fleet was in port, and within twenty-four hours almost everyone was ferried to the mainland. But then the agony of the island began in earnest. As in a nightmare, fountains of burning lava spurted three hundred feet high. Black, baseball-size cinders rained down. An evil-smelling, eye-burning, throat-searing cloud of smoke and gas erupted into the air, and a river of lava flowed down the mountain. The constant shriek of escaping steam was punctuated by ear-splitting explosions. As time went on, the once pleasant village of Vestmannaeyjar took on a weird aspect. Its street lamps still burning against the long Arctic night, the town lay under a thick blanket of cinders. All that could be seen above the ten-foot black drifts were the tips of street signs. Some houses had collapsed under the weight of cinders; others had burst into flames as the heat ignited their oil storage tanks. Lighting the whole lurid scene, fire continued to shoot from the mouth of the looming volcano.

  The eruption continued for six months. Scientists and reporters arrived from around the world to observe the awesome natural event. But the town did not die that easily. In July, when the eruption ceased, the people of Heimaey Island returned to assess the chances of rebuilding their homes and lives. They found tons of ash covering the ground. The Icelanders are a tough people, however, accustomed to the strange and violent nature of their Arctic land. They dug out their homes. They even used the cinders to build new roads and airport runways. Now the new homes of Heimaey are warmed from water pipes heated by molten lava.

  This liquid was coming from the

  A. mountains
  B. ground
  C. sea
  D. sky
  E. ocean
  B. ground

• Question 229:

  For the last three years, entomologists have been searching for a parasite to help control a whitefly that has recently become a serious crop pest. Believing this new pest to be a variety of sweet-potato whitefly, the entomologists confined their search to parasites of the sweet-potato whitefly. Genetic research now shows the new pest to be a distinct species, the silver leaf whitefly. Therefore, the search for a parasite has so far been wasted effort.

  Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

  A. All varieties of the sweet-potato whitefly are serious crop pests.
  B. If a crop pest has a parasite, that parasite can always be used to control that pest.
  C. The chances of successfully identifying a useful parasite of the new pest have increased since the proper identification of the pest.
  D. No parasite of the sweet-potato whitefly is also a parasite of the silver leaf whitefly.
  E. In the last three years, the entomologists found no parasites of the sweet-potato whitefly.
  D. No parasite of the sweet-potato whitefly is also a parasite of the silver leaf whitefly.

  ---

  The conclusion, signaled by "therefore" in the final sentence, is that the search for a parasite has been a wasted effort. Entomologists were searching for a parasite to the sweet-potato whitefly, believing that species to be a serious crop pest, but the culprit turned out to be the silver leaf whitefly instead. It is because of this error that the author concludes that the search has so far been a waste. Perhaps you were able to prephrase an alternative to this scenario: What if a parasite that would control the sweet-potato fly would also be effective against the silver leaf? Then it would be a bit rash to say that the effort thus far has been totally in vain, no? In order for the conclusion to stand, therefore, it must be assumed that no sweet-potato whitefly parasite is also a parasite of the silver leaf whitefly. If there is a parasite common to both the denial of option [No parasite of the sweet-potato whitefly is] -- then arguing that the search has been a total waste would be premature since it's possible they'd be able to use what they found against the silver leaf species anyway.

• Question 230:

  The organizer of a reading club will select at least five and at most six works from a group of nine works. The group consists of three French novels, three Russian novels, two French plays, and one Russian play. The organizer's selection of

  works must conform to the following requirements:

  No more than four French works are selected.

  At least three but no more than four novels are selected.

  At least as many French novels as Russian novels are selected.

  If both French plays are selected, then the Russian play is not selected.

  The organizer must at least select

  A. one French novel and one French play
  B. one French novel and one Russian play
  C. one Russian novel and one French play
  D. two French novels
  E. two Russian novels
  D. two French novels

  ---

  The very appearance of this question might have suggested to you, at the outset, that there's at least one fact about the selection process that is inferable from the rules alone. But whether you worked it out up front or now, how come? Because to choose a single French novel would restrict us to a single Russian novel (Rule 3), and that plus Rule 4 would ensure that we could never meet our quota of five works mandated in the opening ? At most we'd be restricted to four: the French novel, the Russian novel, and two plays. In order to meet the requirement of five works minimum, we must choose at least two French novels at all times. And if you look back over the first three questions, we've done just that all along.