# Past LSAT Explained/PrepTest 38

October 2002 Form 2LSS53

## Section I Logical ReasoningEdit

### Question 01Edit

The argument says that because of the new health program; there will be an increase in heart attack. We have to find a way to bridge the gap from the health program to increase in heart attack. According to the passage a sudden increase in exercise can increase heart attack. This bridges the gap. Hence, the new health care much have an extensive exercise plan. Let’s look at the options.

• A. I think this is it but let’s confirm by POE
• B. Doesn’t bridge the gap, so what if its strenuous how do we know if increases heart attack
• C. Yeah, but does not mean that it will be intense enough to induce a heart attack not strong enough
• D. No bride in the gap- does not solve
• E. So what if they participate; doesn’t increase the chances of heart attack

### Question 02Edit

This is a main conclusion it tells us about how two companies both released two products that are identical. The key word is they CLAIM that they did not work together. Thus showing that the person is doubtful hence that is the main conclusion. Which is what we should be looking for.

• A. That’s true but it is not the main point
• B. It does not say who copied who.
• C. This is perfect
• D. No it says that the problems are similar; this is not mentioned in the argument
• E. Nope, does not say that anywhere in the passage.

### Question 03Edit

The argument here is about an Anthropologist who did a study and did not report the finding. A chemist found out about it and called her a fraud. However, she countered by saying that the test was invalid since the sample was compromised. We are looking for an argument that supports the chemist and does not account for the anthologist reply.

• A. This does not apply we know that Anth. Conducted both experiments
• B. No, the scientist did not report disconfirmations
• C. No, argument says she Is guilty of frad
• D. Not applicable they do not know if it is invalid
• E. Best, match

### Question 04Edit

What strengthens the arguments? We need something to strengthen the fact that the results do not need to be reported.

• A. Does not strengthen the argument.
• B. Yes, but not strengthen since we do not know how long it was out for
• C. Perfect, we know that the toxin was in acidic solution, if it is undectable the test are null and void.
• D. Irrelevant
• E. Doesn’t do anything to argument

### Question 05Edit

Naima- Says that the computer system will be faster and should be done as soon as possible. While Nakai, argues that they should keep the current system for as long as possible since the cause is not worth it. The questions as what they disagree on.

• B. Nakia, does not disagree she just says that it is too early
• C. Not saying its impossible
• D. Irrelevant
• E. Yes, Naima says as soon as possible while , Nakia, says later

pundit

stopgap

## Section II Analytical ReasoningEdit

Game 1

Game 2

Game 3

Game 4

### Question 24Edit

Passage 1 Natural Science

Passage 2 Law

### Question 14Edit

Passage 3 Social Science

### Question 20Edit

Passage 3 Humanity

## Section IV Logical ReasoningEdit

### Question 12Edit

Withheld from Scoring.

### Question 26Edit

The following materials are adapted for this LSAT.

• Bruce Curtis, "Mapping the Social: Note s from Jacob Keefer's Educational Tours, 1845." 1993 by Bruce Curtis.