LSAC LSAT-TEST Online Practice Questions and Exam Preparation

LSAC LSAT-TEST Online Questions & Answers

• Question 341:

  Parents should not necessarily raise their children in the ways experts recommend, even if some of those experts are themselves parents. After all, parents are the ones who directly experience which methods are successful in raising their own children.

  Which one of the following most closely conforms to the principle that the passage above illustrates?

  A. Although music theory is intrinsically interesting and may be helpful to certain musicians, it does not distinguish good music from bad: that is a matter of taste and not of theory.
  B. One need not pay much attention to the advice of automotive experts when buying a car if those experts are not interested in the mundane factors that concern the average consumer.
  C. In deciding the best way to proceed, a climber familiar with a mountain might do well to ignore the advice of mountain climbing experts unfamiliar with that mountain.
  D. A typical farmer is less likely to know what types of soil are most productive than is someone with an advanced degree in agricultural science.
  E. Unlike society, one's own conscience speaks with a single voice; it is better to follow the advice of one's own conscience than the advice of society.
  C. In deciding the best way to proceed, a climber familiar with a mountain might do well to ignore the advice of mountain climbing experts unfamiliar with that mountain.

  ---

  The question stem tells us we must locate the principle in the stimulus and then find the choice containing an argument that functions in a similar manner. So this Principle question has a Parallel Reasoning feel to it. The author of the stimulus says that parents shouldn't always listen to the advice of child-rearing experts (whoever they are), because parents are the ones with direct experience. So we're looking for a choice that says "don't listen to the experts, direct experience is what counts." That's option [In deciding the best way to proceed...], which says don't listen to mountain climbing experts that don't know the mountain you are climbing.

• Question 342:

  A study of young and middle-aged men in the United States has found that the men whose diet was high in saturated fat also had a high amount of blood cholesterol. In another experiment, when the blood cholesterol level of laboratory rabbits was raised by feeding them exclusively on cholesterol, fat deposits formed in their blood vessels. Similar fat deposits are found in human patients of heart disease. Therefore, to reduce the occurrence of heart disease, people should reduce their dietary consumption of saturated fat.

  Each of the following, if true, weakens the above argument EXCEPT:

  A. The bodily reactions of animal models to internal or external stimulants are often poor predictors of the reactions of the human body to the same stimulants.
  B. The per capita consumption of saturated fat in the United States has decreased by 27 percent since 1970 while the occurrence of heart disease in the country has increased by 400 percent in the same period.
  C. An analysis of studies done on more than 600,000 men and women has established that blood cholesterol is inversely associated with the risk of death from infectious respiratory and digestive diseases.
  D. A study that covered more than 10,000 individuals has found no relationship between the amount of blood cholesterol and the occurrence of heart disease.
  E. In a study where the dietary saturated fat consumption of young and middle-aged American women was three to seven times higher than normal, the blood cholesterol level remained unchanged.
  C. An analysis of studies done on more than 600,000 men and women has established that blood cholesterol is inversely associated with the risk of death from infectious respiratory and digestive diseases.

  ---

  Argument construction

  Premise 1: A study of young and middle-aged men in the United States has found that the men whose diet was high in saturated fat (SF) also had a high amount of blood cholesterol (BC).

  So, this premise can be simplified as: High SF is correlated with high BC in young and middle-aged American males.

  Premise 2: In another experiment, when the blood cholesterol level (BC) of laboratory rabbits was raised by feeding them on cholesterol, fat deposits (FD) were found in their blood vessels.

  This premise can be simplified as: In lab rabbits, when BC became high, FD formed.

  Premise 3: Similar fat deposits (FD) are found in human patients of heart disease (HD).

  So, per this premise, FD is correlated with HD in humans.

  By combining these three premises, the following conclusion is drawn:

  Conclusion: To reduce the occurrence of heart disease, people should reduce their dietary consumption of saturated fat.

  In simpler form: To reduce HD, people should reduce SF.

  The structure of this argument can be visually depicted as under:

  

  There are a few things to note about the way this argument is drawn:

  The argument's conclusion draws broad generalizations whereas the premises are not similarly general in their scope:

  1.

  Premise 1 mentions a finding about one demographic - young and middle -aged American men ?while the conclusion drawn is a generalization that seems to apply to all";people"; irrespective of age, gender or nationality.

  2.

  Premise 2 mentions a finding about laboratory rabbits while the conclusion drawn is about humans. The argument confounds correlation with causation.

  This is proved by the conclusion that reducing SF will cause reduced occurrence of heart disease. However, the premises do not offer grounds for such causality:

  1.

  Premise 1 only states that in one particular group, high SF is correlated with high BC. We cannot infer from this whether it is high SF that caused high BC, or whether high BC caused high SF (for example, by inducing cravings for food that is high SF), or whether some other third factor was the cause of both high SF and high BC (for example, if the individuals of this particular group have a genetic predisposition towards higher BC than other ethnic and/or age groups and also have a diet that is high in SC).

  2.

  In Premise 2, since FD follows an increase in BC, the said increase in BC does seem to cause the FD; however, this causal link is still an assumption and is not explicitly stated by the argument. Alternate explanations might be possible. For example, since these rabbits were fed exclusively on cholesterol, perhaps they developed deficiency of some vital nutrient X (which they usually got from their normal diet) and it was the lack of this nutrient X that caused the formation of FD. With such an explanation, one can see that if the rabbits had continued to consume as much cholesterol as they did in this study but along with the required amounts of X, they would not have formed FD.

  3.

  In Premise 3, FD is found in human patients of HD. This is not enough to conclusively establish that FD causes HD in humans. For example, when the virus of common cold enters the human body, the body activates its immune system and produces antibodies to neutralize that virus. There is a brief period when, if a blood sample is taken from the body, both the virus and the antibodies will be found in it. From this coexistence, drawing a conclusion that the antibodies produced/caused the virus would be wrong. Correlation does not always imply causality, and even when it does, the direction of that causality is not always clear (if A and B coexist, then does A cause B or does B cause A?).

  Not only does the argument make an unreasonable assumption that high SF causes high HD, but it also assumes that the converse of this statement would be true ?that is, low SF would cause low HD.

  1.

  The evidence presented in premises 1 and 2 is about high SF and high blood cholesterol. Using this evidence to draw the conclusion that low SF would have the opposite effect to that of high SF is fallacious.

  2.

  For example, the following statement is true: "high stress causes high blood pressure." However, the converse of this - "low stress causes low blood pressure" ?is not true.

  This is a 'Weaken EXCEPT' question. Therefore, four of the answer choices will weaken the argument. We will be looking for the single statement that does not weaken it.

  Let us analyze the options one by one.

  Answer choices explanation

  [The bodily reactions of animal models to internal or external stimulants...] This option is incorrect. This statement does weaken the argument by suggesting that the use of premise 2 (which describes the bodily reaction of an animal model to high BC) to draw a conclusion about the bodily reaction of the humans to high BC may not be correct. Without this premise, the conclusion cannot hold.

  [The per capita consumption of saturated fat in the United States has decreased...] This option is incorrect. This statement does weaken the argument by providing empirical evidence that in the same period in which SF decreased, HD increased by a lot more. This suggests that some factor, other than SF, causes HD and therefore disproves the causal assumptions that went into the drawing of the conclusion.

  [An analysis of studies done on more than 600,000 men and women has...] This option is correct. This statement does not weaken the argument. From this statement, we learn some benefits of high blood cholesterol and risks of low blood cholesterol. However, the argument's main concern was not whether the overall impact of high blood cholesterol on human health is beneficial or not. The argument suggests only one specific effect of high blood cholesterol ?that it causes heart disease. Likewise, the conclusion is only concerned about reducing HD. If reducing HD by reducing SF has some other side-effects (like increased risk of infections, as this option statement seems to suggest), then so be it. These are "other" side-effects and are outside the scope of the argument. The author is only claiming that reducing SF will reduce HD. He is not claiming that reducing SF will reduce the occurrence of all kinds of diseases.

  [A study that covered more than 10,000 individuals has found...] This option is incorrect. This statement weakens the argument. It states that in humans, high blood cholesterol does not lead to HD. This directly disproves the subsidiary conclusion that can be drawn by combining premises 2 and 3 while also assuming that correlation implies causation, this subsidiary conclusion being that high blood cholesterol leads to HD.

  [In a study where the dietary saturated fat consumption of young...] This option is incorrect. It weakens the argument. It shows that the extrapolation of premise 1 to all humans (as has been done in the argument) was incorrect. When females of a similar age-group and nationality as the men in the study that is cited in premise 1 ate a high SF diet, their blood cholesterol did not increase. This suggests that there is not a simple causal link between high SF and high BC. The chain of causations on which the conclusion rests therefore stands broken.

• Question 343:

  One of the most vexing problems in historiography is dating an event when the usual sources offer conflicting chronologies of the event. Historians should attempt to minimize the number of competing sources, perhaps by eliminating the less credible ones. Once this is achieved and several sources are left, as often happens, historians may try, though on occasion unsuccessfully, to determine independently of the usual sources which date is more likely to be right.

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

  A. We have no plausible chronology of most of the events for which attempts have been made by historians to determine the right date.
  B. Some of the events for which there are conflicting chronologies and for which attempts have been made by historians to determine the right date cannot be dated reliably by historians.
  C. Attaching a reliable date to any event requires determining which of several conflicting chronologies is most likely to be true.
  D. Determining independently of the usual sources which of several conflicting chronologies is more likely to be right is an ineffective way of dating events.
  E. The soundest approach to dating an event for which the usual sources give conflicting chronologies is to undermine the credibility of as many of these sources as possible.
  B. Some of the events for which there are conflicting chronologies and for which attempts have been made by historians to determine the right date cannot be dated reliably by historians.

  ---

  Next up is another Inference question. There's nothing particularly concrete that jumps off the page, nor is there any kind of formal logic to speak of, so our best bet is to get the overall gist and then hit the choices. The topic is "historiography and you shouldn't get alarmed if you don't have a precise definition at your fingertips. That's not necessary; we learn soon enough that the author is simply concerned with how historians date events. When there are multiple sources with conflicting accounts of when something happened, the author suggests narrowing down the field by chopping off the sources that are least credible. If there are still a number of sources remaining, historians should set them aside and determine themselves which date seems most plausible. This, however, doesn't always work.

• Question 344:

  Exactly five cars ?Frank's, Marquitta's, Orlando's, Taishah's, and Vinquetta's ?are washed, each exactly once. The cars are washed one at a time, with each receiving exactly one kind of wash: regular, super, or premium. The following

  conditions must apply:

  The first car washed does not receive a super wash, though at least one car does.

  Exactly one car receives a premium wash. The second and third cars washed receive the same kind of wash as each other.

  Neither Orlando's nor Taishah's is washed before Vinquetta's.

  Marquitta's is washed before Frank's, but after Orlando's. Marquitta's and the car washed immediately before Marquitta's receive regular washes.

  Which one of the following must be true?

  A. Vinquetta's car receives a premium wash.
  B. Exactly two cars receive a super wash.
  C. The fifth car washed receives a super wash.
  D. The fourth car washed receives a super wash.
  E. The second car washed receives a regular wash.
  E. The second car washed receives a regular wash.

  ---

  No new information, and we're looking for something that must be true. A quick glance should be all that's necessary to evaluate each choice.

• Question 345:

  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 Amy was the second to perform, who was the third performer in the ceremony?

  A. Bob
  B. Chad
  C. Dom
  D. Grant
  E. Fischer
  B. Chad

  ---

  We know that Amy is the second performer. Thus, we can deduce that E must be in the 5th slot (since E cannot be before A in this case).

  

  We know that C and D are consecutive with G following them. Thus, the only way possible is if C and D take up the 3rd and 4th slots. However, G can be either in the 6th or 7th slot. This is represented below: Case I:

  

  Case II:

  

  However, in any of the three scenarios, the 3rd performer is Chad.

  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 346:

  Historian: Leibniz, the seventeenth-century philosopher, published his version of calculus before Newton did. But then Newton revealed his private notebooks, which showed he had been using these ideas for at least a decade before Leibniz's publication. Newton also claimed that he had disclosed these ideas to Leibniz in a letter shortly before Leibniz's publication. Yet close examination of the letter shows that Newton's few cryptic remarks did not reveal anything important about calculus. Thus, Leibniz and Newton each independently discovered calculus.

  Which one of the following is an assumption required by the historian's argument?

  A. Leibniz did not tell anyone about calculus prior to publishing his version of it.
  B. No third person independently discovered calculus prior to Newton and Leibniz.
  C. Newton believed that Leibniz was able to learn something important about calculus from his letter to him.
  D. Neither Newton nor Leibniz knew that the other had developed a version of calculus prior to Leibniz's publication.
  E. Neither Newton nor Leibniz learned crucial details about calculus from some third source.
  E. Neither Newton nor Leibniz learned crucial details about calculus from some third source.

  ---

  This argument is like a soap opera -- lots of back and forth and intrigue over where the true credit for a discovery lies.

  The last sentence (set off by "Thus") contains the author's conclusion that Leibniz and Newton each discovered calculus independently. What's the evidence for this claim? Despite Newton's thoughts on calculus that predate Leibniz's

  publication, and even his sharing some of these ideas with Leibniz, close examination reveals that nothing significant was conveyed to Leibniz on the subject. But is this enough to warrant the conclusion that they therefore each discovered

  calculus independently. Here's where your ability to form alternatives and to ask yourself "But what if...?" is rewarded: What if someone else contributed to their discovery of calculus? If Leibniz or Newton or both had been given crucial details

  from some outside source, then the author wouldn't be able to argue that these two each discovered calculus independently. The author must therefore be assuming that no third party was involved. Whether you thought of this on your own,

  or recognized the validity of the option [Neither Newton nor Leibniz learned crucial...]. when you saw it, it's all the same -- another point on the board.

• Question 347:

  Joseph: My encyclopedia says that the mathematician Pierre de Fermat died in 1665 without leaving behind any written proof for a theorem that he claimed nonetheless to have proved. Probably this alleged theorem simply cannot be proved, since ?as the article points out ?no one else has been able to prove it. Therefore, it is likely that Fermat was either lying or else mistaken when he made his claim. Laura: Your encyclopedia is out of date. Recently someone has in fact proved Fermat's theorem. And since the theorem is provable, your claim ?that Fermat was lying or mistaken ?clearly is wrong.

  Which one of the following most accurately describes a reasoning error in Laura's argument?

  A. It purports to establish its conclusion by making a claim that, if true, would actually contradict that conclusion.
  B. It mistakenly assumes that the quality of a person's character can legitimately be taken to guarantee the accuracy of the claims that person has made.
  C. It mistakes something that is necessary for its conclusion to follow for something that ensures that the conclusion follows.
  D. It uses the term "provable" without defining it.
  E. It fails to distinguish between a true claim that has mistakenly been believed to be false and a false claim that has mistakenly been believed to be true.
  C. It mistakes something that is necessary for its conclusion to follow for something that ensures that the conclusion follows.

  ---

  Laura's evidence is that someone has proved the theorem, and her conclusion is that Fermat was not lying nor mistaken. She assumes that because the theorem has now been proven, Fermat must have also proved it. For her conclusion to be correct that Fermat was not lying or mistaken, it is necessary that the theorem be proved, but the fact that someone has proved the theorem isn't sufficient to make her case. With all due respect to Fermat, the fact that someone else has proved the theorem does not necessarily mean that Fermat has. Choice [mistakes something that is necessary for its...] identifies the necessary/sufficient flaw in Laura's argument.

• Question 348:

  Juan: Unlike the ancient Olympic games on which they are based, the modern Olympics include professional as well as amateur athletes. But since amateurs rarely have the financial or material resources available to professionals, it is

  unlikely that the amateurs will ever offer a serious challenge to professionals in those Olympic events in which amateurs compete against professionals. Hence, the presence of professional athletes violates the spirit of fairness essential to

  the games.

  Michiko: But the idea of the modern Olympics is to how case the world's finest athletes, regardless of their backgrounds or resources. Hence, professionals should be allowed to compete.

  Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines Juan's argument?

  A. In general, amateur athletes tend to outnumber professional athletes in the modern Olympics.
  B. In certain events in the modern Olympics the best few competitors are amateurs; in certain other events the best few competitors are professionals.
  C. The concept of "amateur" and "professional" athletics would have been unfamiliar to the ancient Greeks on whose games the modern Olympics are based.
  D. In the modern Olympics there has been no noticeable correlation between the financial or material resources expended on the training of individual athletes and the eventual performance of those athletes.
  E. Many amateur athletes who take part in international competitions receive no financial or material support from the governments of the countries that the amateurs represent.
  D. In the modern Olympics there has been no noticeable correlation between the financial or material resources expended on the training of individual athletes and the eventual performance of those athletes.

  ---

  D. directly severs the link between training resources and Olympic performance in the modern era. As a result, Juan's pessimism that Olympic amateurs can never seriously challenge pros because of the latter's material advantages is highly unjustified. If option [In general, amateur athletes tend to...] is true, then the pros may still have an edge over the amateurs, but not for the reason that Juan proposes.

• Question 349:

  Consumer advocate: The introduction of a new drug into the marketplace should be contingent upon our having a good understanding of its social impact. However, the social impact of the newly marketed antihistamine is far from clear. It is obvious, then, that there should be a general reduction in the pace of bringing to the marketplace new drugs that are now being tested.

  Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

  A. The social impact of the new antihistamine is much better understood than that of the newest drugs being tested.
  B. The social impact of some of the new drugs being tested is poorly understood,
  C. The economic success of some drugs is inversely proportional to how well we understand their social impact.
  D. The new antihistamine is chemically similar to some of the new drugs being tested.
  E. The new antihistamine should be on the market only if the newest drugs being tested should be on the market also.
  A. The social impact of the new antihistamine is much better understood than that of the newest drugs being tested.

  ---

  The consumer advocate says that we need to understand a product's social impact before it's marketed, but the new antihistamine is being marketed now even though its impact isn't well understood. The consumer advocate thinks that it's therefore obvious that we need to slow down the process of bringing products to the marketplace. But hold on: Is the new antihistamine representative of products in general, or is it an exception? If it's an exception, then we can't learn much from considering it. However, if option [The social impact of the new antihistamine is...] is true, and the newest drugs under consideration are even worse understood, then we'd be able to conclude that most drugs under consideration aren't well understood. In that case, the danger of releasing drugs that aren't well understood seems greater, which strengthens the advocate's claim.

• Question 350:

  The raisin business in America was born by accident. It happened in 1873 in the San Joaquin Valley of California. Many farmers raised grapes in this valley. That year, just before the grape harvest, there was a heat wave. It was one of the worst heat waves ever known. It was so hot the grapes dried on the vines. When they were picked, California had its first raisin crop. People were surprised to find how good raisins were. Everybody wanted more. So the San Joaquin farmers went into the raisin business. Today, of course, they do not let the grapes dry on the vines. They treat them with much more care. In late August the grapes start to ripen. They are tested often for sweetness. The growers wait until the sugar content is twenty-one percent. Then they know the grapes are ripe enough to be picked. Skilled workers come to the vineyards. They pick the bunches of grapes by hand. The workers fill their flat pans with grapes. They gently empty the pans onto squares of paper. These squares lie between the long rows of vines. They sit in the sun. Here the grapes stay while the sun does its work. It may take two weeks or longer. The grapes are first dried on one side. When they have reached the right color, they are turned to dry on the other side. The grapes are dried until only fifteen percent of the moisture is left. Then they have turned into raisins. The raisins are rolled up in the paper on which they have dried. Trucks take them from the fields. They are poured into big boxes called sweatboxes. Each box holds one hundred and sixty pounds of raisins. Here, any raisins that are a bit too dry take moisture from those that have a bit too much. After a while they are all just moist enough. The big boxes are trucked next to the packaging plant. They are emptied onto a conveyor belt that shakes the raisins gently. This knocks them from their stems. A blast of air whisks the stems away. The water bath is next. Then the plump brown raisins have a last inspection. They are again checked for moisture and sugar. Then they go on a belt to packing machines. Here they are poured into packages, which are automatically weighed and sealed. The raisins are now ready for market.

  What is the main idea of this passage?

  A. The creation of raisins in America was an accident.
  B. The process of raisin development requires multiple steps.
  C. Raisins on the grocery store shelf undergo a brief fermentation process.
  D. Raisins are cleaned thoroughly at the packing plant.
  E. California has been the leader in American raisin development.
  B. The process of raisin development requires multiple steps.