LSAC LSAT-TEST Online Practice Questions and Exam Preparation

LSAC LSAT-TEST Online Questions & Answers

• Question 81:

  Some people claim that the reason herbs are not prescribed as drugs by licensed physicians is that the medical effectiveness of herbs is seriously in doubt. No drug can be offered for sale, however, unless it has regulatory-agency approval for medicinal use in specific illnesses or conditions. It costs about $200 million to get regulatory-agency approval for a drug, and only the holder of a patent can expect to recover such large expenses. Although methods of extracting particular substances from herbs can be patented, herbs themselves and their medicinal uses cannot be. Therefore, under the current system licensed physicians cannot recommend the medicinal use of herbs.

  The argument depends on the assumption that

  A. the medical ineffectiveness of many herbs a streatments for specific illnesses or conditions is well established
  B. the only time a substance is properly used as a drug is when it is prescribed as a drug by a licensed physician
  C. a licensed physician cannot recommend the medicinal use of an herb unless that herb is offered for sale as a drug
  D. some other substances, besides herbs, are not available as drugs because the illnesses they could effectively treat are too uncommon to allow those substances to be marketed profitably as drugs
  E. the cost of medical care would be substantially reduced if faster ways of obtaining regulatory-agency approval for new drugs could be found
  C. a licensed physician cannot recommend the medicinal use of an herb unless that herb is offered for sale as a drug

  ---

  The author commits a bit of a scope shift early on, one that needs to be repaired by the central assumption. She reports that people are questioning the reason why physicians don't prescribe herbs; they think it's because physicians doubt herbs' effectiveness. Next she says "No drug can be offered for sale, however, unless..." -- emphasis ours, to highlight the scope shift -- and the rest of the argument details the seemingly insuperable problems obstructing the offering of drugs for sale. But the issue was sheer prescription, or the word the author later uses, "recommendation." What about, one might ask in response, physicians prescribing free herbs? Couldn't they do so? Not to the author, they couldn't. So she must be assuming that a necessary condition of a physician's prescription be that the herb be offered as a "drug for sale." If option [a licensed physician cannot recommend...] is false -- if a physician can recommend an herb that's not a drug for sale -- then the argument falls apart.

• Question 82:

  The student body at this university takes courses in a wide range of disciplines. Miriam is a student at this university, so she takes courses in a wide range of disciplines.

  Which one of the following arguments exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to that exhibited by the argument above?

  A. The students at this school take mathematics. Miguel is a student at this school, so he takes mathematics.
  B. The editorial board of this law journal has written on many legal issues. Louise is on the editorial; board, so she has written on many legal issues.
  C. The component parts of bulldozers are heavy. This machine is a bulldozer, so it is heavy.
  D. All older automobiles need frequent oil changes. This car is new, so its oil need not be changed as frequently.
  E. The individual cells of the brain are incapable of thinking. Therefore, the brain as a whole is incapable of thinking.
  B. The editorial board of this law journal has written on many legal issues. Louise is on the editorial; board, so she has written on many legal issues.

  ---

  Some students reported having trouble with this one on test day in December 1999. For some, it was because the logic struck them as correct, not "flawed" at all (even though the question stem is quite clear on that point). "Hey," they

  protested, "the students there take a wide range of courses and Miriam's a student--she must take a wide range too!"

  Nosiree! This is an example of a classic whole-to-part miscalculation. It is true of the student body taken in the aggregate that they take a wide range of courses. This doesn't have an impact on any one individual. It is eminently possible for a

  student, Miriam for instance, to take nothing but literature courses, and yet the generalization would remain true. So we're looking for a choice containing a similar error.

• Question 83:

  This morning, a bakery makes exactly one delivery, consisting of exactly six loaves of bread. Each of the loaves is exactly one of three kinds: oatmeal, rye, or wheat, and each is either sliced or unsliced. The loaves that the bakery delivers this morning must be consistent with the following:

  Which one of the following statements must be true?

  A. At least one of the loaves is rye.
  B. At least one of the loaves is wheat.
  C. At least one of the loaves is sliced.
  D. No more than four oatmeal loaves are sliced.
  E. No more than four wheat loaves are sliced.
  D. No more than four oatmeal loaves are sliced.

  ---

  This is another one that must be checked choice by choice, but you can (and should!) do so strategically. The best place to start is with the correct choice for Acceptability question 1: There we saw that we could have all unsliced loaves, and no wheat loaves, which proves that neither option [At least one of the loaves is wheat.] nor option [At least one of the loaves is sliced.] must be true.

• Question 84:

  By the year 2030, the Earth's population is expected to increase to 10 billion; ideally, all would enjoy standards of living equivalent to those of present-day industrial democracies. However, if 10 billion people consume critical natural resources such as copper, nickel, and petroleum at the current per capita rates of industrialized countries, and if new resources are not discovered or substitutes developed, such an ideal would last a decade or less. Moreover, projections based on the current rate of waste production in many industrialized countries suggest that 10 billion people would generate enough solid waste every year to bury a large city and its surrounding suburbs 100 meters deep.

  These estimates are not meant to predict a grim future. Instead they emphasize the incentives for recycling, conservation, and a switch to alternative materials. They also suggest that the traditional model of industrial activity, in which individual manufacturing processes take in raw materials and generate products to be sold plus waste to be disposed of, should be transformed into a more integrated model: an industrial ecosystem. In such a system the consumption of energy and materials is optimized, wastes and pollution are minimized, and the effluents of one process ?whether they are spent catalysts from petroleum refining or discarded plastic containers from consumer products ?serve as the raw material for another process.

  Materials in an ideal industrial ecosystem would not be depleted any more than are materials in a biological ecosystem, in which plants synthesize nutrients that feed herbivores, some of which in turn feed a chain of carnivores whose waste products and remains eventually feed further generations of plants. A chunk of steel could potentially show up one year in a tin can, the next year in an automobile, and 10 years later in the skeleton of a building. Some manufacturers are already making use of "designed offal" in the manufacture of metals and some plastics: tailoring the production of waste from a manufacturing process so that the waste can be fed directly back into that process or a related one. Such recycling still requires the expenditure of energy and the unavoidable generation of some wastes and harmful by-products, but at much lower levels than are typical today. The ideal industrial ecosystem, in which there is an economically viable role for every product of a manufacturing process, will not be attained soon; current technology is often inadequate to the task. However, if industrialized nations embrace major and minor changes in their current industrial practices and developing nations bypass older, less ecologically sound technologies, it should be possible to develop a more closed industrial ecosystem that would be more sustainable than current industrial practices, especially in the face of decreasing supplies of raw materials and-increasing problems of waste and pollution.

  The author of the passage would most probably agree with which one of the following statements about standards of living?

  A. An increase in the standard of living in developing countries will be accompanied by a decrease in the standard of living in industrialized countries.
  B. It is likely that the standard of living of both industrialized and developing countries will decrease substantially by the year 2030.
  C. The current standard of living of industrialized countries cannot be sustained if the population of the world increases.
  D. All countries could enjoy a high standard of living without depleting natural resources if industrialized and developing countries implemented an ideal industrial ecosystem.
  E. Supplies of critical natural resources will be in serious danger of depletion by the year 2030 unless the current standard of living of both industrialized and developing countries is reduced.
  D. All countries could enjoy a high standard of living without depleting natural resources if industrialized and developing countries implemented an ideal industrial ecosystem.

  ---

  The sentence "Most probably agree" signals Inference, and the Buzzword phrase "standards of living" should send you up top, where the author asserts his "ideal" of everyone, all 10 billion of us, enjoying the same standards. Think Globally does the author think that that can happen? Sure, if the "iie" ever came to pass Remember, he explicitly told us to reject the prediction of a grim future. A quick scan of the choices in search of this kind of optimism must yield option [All countries could enjoy a high standard of living...], it's the idea that underlies the entire plan thereafter outlined.

• Question 85:

  By passing more and more regulations allegedly to protect the environment, the state is driving the manufacturing industry away. And when the employers leave, the workers will follow. The number of new no growth or environmental rules passed each year is increasing by leaps and bounds. Rich environmentalists who think they are sympathetic to workers have no real sympathy for the blue-collar employees are injured by their activities.

  One major manufacturer has been fined for failing to establish a car-pool plan. Another is accused of polluting the air with industrial emissions, although everyone knows that two thirds of the pollutants come from cars and trucks. No wonder the large manufacturers are moving to states with fewer restrictive laws. And as the manufacturers go, unemployment and the number of workers leaving the state will rise more rapidly than ever before. Which one of the following is NOT an

  argument of this passage?

  A. Environmentalists are responsible for depriving workers of their jobs.
  B. When workers leave a state, it is a sign that manufacturers will follow.
  C. A car-pool law should not be enforced, as cars and trucks are responsible for most air pollution.
  D. Large manufacturers prefer states with fewer restrictions.
  E. A rise in unemployment will lead to an increase in workers leaving the state.
  B. When workers leave a state, it is a sign that manufacturers will follow.

  ---

  The passage makes no comment on workers leaving before a manufacturer. It argues that the loss of manufacturers leads to a loss of workers [A rise in unemployment will lead to an increase...].

• Question 86:

  Some types of organisms originated through endosymbiosis, the engulfing of one organism by another so that a part of the former becomes a functioning part of the latter. An unusual nucteomorph, a structure that contains DNA and resembles a cell nucleus, has been discovered within a plant known as a chlorarachniophyte. Two versions of a particular gene have been found in the DNA of this nucleomorph, and one would expect to find only a single version of this gene if the nucleomorph were not the remains of an engulfed organism's nucleus.

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

  A. Only organisms of types that originated through endosymbiosis contain nucleomorphs.
  B. A nucleomorph within the chlorarachniophyte holds all of the genetic material of some other organism.
  C. Nucleomorphs originated when an organism endosymbiotically engulfed a chtorarachniophyte.
  D. Two organisms will not undergo endosymbiosisunless at least one of them contains a nucleomorph.
  E. Chlorarachniophytes emerged as the result of two organisms having undergone endosymbiosis.
  E. Chlorarachniophytes emerged as the result of two organisms having undergone endosymbiosis.

  ---

  This next Inference question involves a scientifically challenging argument. But buried amidst the technical terms is some fairly straightforward formal logic, so hopefully you didn't let yourself get bogged down in the terminology. Endo (no reason not to shorten this) is a process by which one organism engulfs another and the engulfed organism becomes a functioning part of the whole. Something strange that looks like a cell nucleus (let's shorten its cumber somename to nuc) has been found inside a plant (chlor); can you see where this is going? Perhaps endosymbiosis occurred here? What follows requires some interpretation (and that's, after all, what Inference questions are all about--interpretingand combining): If the nuc was NOT originally part of an organism that got engulfed, then we'd expect one version of a particular gene in its DNA. That's a simple formal logic statement, albeit one with complicated terms. Nonetheless, the contrapositive applies: If there's NOT one version of the gene, then the nuc WAS part of something that got engulfed. And we're told, in fact, that there are TWO versions of the gene, so we know for sure that engulfing took place.

• Question 87:

  It is inaccurate to say that a diet high in refined sugar cannot cause adult-onset diabetes, since a diet high in refined sugar can make a person overweight, and being overweight can predispose a person to adult-onset diabetes.

  The argument is most parallel, in its logical structure, to which one of the following?

  A. It is inaccurate to say that being in cold air can cause a person to catch a cold, since colds are caused by viruses, and viruses flourish in warm, crowded places.
  B. It is accurate to say that no airline flies from Halifax to Washington. No airline offers a direct flight, although some airlines have flights from Halifax to Boston and others have flights from Boston to Washington.
  C. It is correct to say that over fertilization is the primary cause of lawn disease, since fertilizer causes lawn grass to grow rapidly and rapidly growing grass has little resistance to disease.
  D. It is incorrect to say that inferior motor oil cannot cause a car to get poorer gasoline mileage, since inferior motor oil can cause engine valve deterioration, and engine valve deterioration can lead to poorer gasoline mileage,
  E. It is inaccurate to say that Alexander the Great was a student of Plato; Alexander was a student of Aristotle and Aristotle was a student of Plato.
  D. It is incorrect to say that inferior motor oil cannot cause a car to get poorer gasoline mileage, since inferior motor oil can cause engine valve deterioration, and engine valve deterioration can lead to poorer gasoline mileage,

  ---

  The author of the stimulus is evidently responding to someone claiming that a diet high in refined sugar can't cause diabetes. "That's inaccurate," says he. How come? Because such a diet can make one overweight, which in turn can lead to diabetes. This can be broken down algebraically: It's wrong to say that X can't cause Y, because X can lead to Z, which in turn can lead to Y.

• Question 88:

  Tina: For centuries oceans and human eccentricity have been linked in the literary and artistic imagination. Such linkage is probably due to the European Renaissance practice of using ships as asylums for the socially undesirable. Sergio: No. Oceans have always been viewed as mysterious and unpredictable -- qualities that people have invariably associated with eccentricity.

  Tina's and Sergio's statements lend the most support to the claim that they disagree about which one of the following statements?

  A. Eccentric humans were considered socially undesirable during the European Renaissance.
  B. Oceans have always been viewed as mysterious and unpredictable.
  C. The linkage between oceans and eccentricity explains the European Renaissance custom of using ships as asylums.
  D. People have never attributed the same qualities to oceans and eccentrics.
  E. The linkage between oceans and eccentricity predates the European Renaissance.
  E. The linkage between oceans and eccentricity predates the European Renaissance.

  ---

  What's the point at issue between Tina and Sergio? Tina senses a literary and artistic link between oceans and eccentricity, and proposes that the Renaissance-era "Ship of Fools" practice is probably the cause. Nope, says Sergio: From time immemorial, the oceans have been perceived as mysterious and unpredictable, and that explains their association with eccentricity. So both accept the connection between oceans and eccentricity, but Tina sees the cause of the link in how a particular culture at a particular timeused the ocean, while to Sergio it's the nature of the ocean itself that's responsible. Note the extreme words that Sergio employs: "always" and "invariably." These words leave little doubt that his time frame for the phenomenon stretches far beyond Tina's explanation, and option [The linkage between oceans and...] captures the dispute perfectly: Tina believes the linkage dates from the European Renaissance (that's the point in time at which she places its cause), while Sergio believes it goes back much further than that.

• Question 89:

  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 is a complete and accurate list of the cars that must receive a regular wash?

  A. Frank's, Marquitta's
  B. Marquitta's, Orlando's
  C. Marquitta's, Orlando's, Taishah's
  D. Marquitta's, Taishah's
  E. Marquitta's, Vinquetta's
  B. Marquitta's, Orlando's

  ---

  M's a wash here (pun intended), since M's car always gets a regular job (Rule 6) and M appears in every choice. In Option 1, V gets regular or premium, and of course we've already seen V in other questions sporting a premium wash, so V can't be part of the right answer. T and F's washes are also pretty wide open in Option 1, so T and F are out too. That narrows it down to B., M and O, and a quick glance confirms that O receives a regular wash in the 2nd time slot in Option 1, and a regular wash in either slots 2 or 3in Option 2.

• Question 90:

  On a Tuesday, an accountant has exactly seven bills -- numbered 1 through 7 -- to pay by Thursday of the same week. The accountant will pay each bill only once according to the following rules:

  Either three or four of the seven bills must be paid on Wednesday, the rest on Thursday.

  Bill 1 cannot be paid on the same day as bill 5.

  Bill 2 must be paid on Thursday.

  Bill 4 must be paid on the same day as bill 7.

  If bill 6 is paid on Wednesday, bill 7 must be paid on Thursday.

  Which one of the following statements must be true?

  A. If bill 2 is paid on Thursday, bill 3 is paid on Wednesday.
  B. If bill 4 is paid on Thursday, bill 1 is paid on Wednesday.
  C. If bill 4 is paid on Thursday, bill 3 is paid on Wednesday.
  D. If bill 6 is paid on Thursday, bill 3 is also paid on Thursday.
  E. If bill 6 is paid on Thursday, bill 4 is also paid on Thursday.
  C. If bill 4 is paid on Thursday, bill 3 is paid on Wednesday.

  ---

  This question provides us with no new information, so unfortunately there's nothing for us to do but test out each choice. The choices are in if/then form, so this could take some time.