Past LSAT Explained/PrepTest 35
October 2001 Form 1LSS51
Section I Logical ReasoningEdit
Question 01Edit
IDENTIFY
This is a Conclusion question.
Question 02Edit
Question 03Edit
Question 04Edit
Question 05Edit
IDENTIFY
This is a Method of Argument question.
READ
Proponent and Opponent discusses the merit of gamma ray radiation of food.
ANALYZE
Your task is to evaluate how the opponent's argument proceeds.
CHOOSE
(A) Incorrect. There is no ambiguity in a crucial term here.
(B) Incorrect. No self-contradiction mentioned.
(C) Incorrect. The proponent only proposes one remedy which is irration by gamma ray.
(D) Incorrect. Safety with respect to producers is not discussed at all in the passage.
(E) Correct. This response suggests an alternative means- using a safe chemical dip. This method without the particular disadvantage which is leaving Salmonella intact.
Question 06Edit
Question 07Edit
Question 08Edit
Question 09Edit
Question 10Edit
Question 11Edit
Question 12Edit
Question 13Edit
Question 14Edit
IDENTIFY
This is an Assumption question. You need to analyze the formal logic strcture of this passage to answer the question.
- novelist
- academia
READ
Some difficult words are here such as intersperse.
ANALYZE
CHOOSE
(A) Incorrect. This response introduces a foreign concept of impartiality which is irrelevant in the passage.
(B) Incorrect. the powers of observation and analysis is only useful but not required. This needs not be assumed. The passage focuses on the intuitive grasp of the emotions and response (B) does not impact the central logic.
(C) Incorrect. Participation in life is not required at all. The logic of the argument hinges on the intuitive grasp which does not require participation.
(D) Correct. To see if this assumption is vital, suppose this response is negated. Novelists can be great without an grasp of the emotions. The factor which prevented the people in the academia from becoming a great novelist is gone! The author can no longer argue that you can't be great if one remain in the academia.
(E) Incorrect. This one is an attractive choice. The key here is the difference between knowledge and an intuitive grasp. The passage leads us to differentiate the aspects of emotions that can be grasped by observing and analyzing them as a dutiful scholar would do. The author argues that there are intangible aspects of the emotions that the scholars miss and that aspects had to be experienced by immersing oneself in real life. Just like you can read about law school but it is nothing like experiencing one.
Question 15Edit
Question 16Edit
Question 17Edit
Question 18Edit
Question 19Edit
Question 20Edit
Question 21Edit
Question 22Edit
Formal logic question
The argument follows:
- c --> ~t
- p --> t (cpositive: ~t --> ~p)
- ~p --> h
So it leads: c --> ~t --> ~p --> h, thus All members of the family H are C.
Question 23Edit
Question 24Edit
Question 25Edit
Question 26Edit
Section II Reading ComprehensionEdit
Passage 1 Social Science French Revolution Women La Villirouet
Question 01Edit
Question 02Edit
Question 03Edit
Question 04Edit
Question 05Edit
Question 06Edit
Passage 2 Humanity Romare Bearden African American History
Question 07Edit
Question 08Edit
Question 09Edit
Question 10Edit
Question 11Edit
Question 12Edit
Question 13Edit
Question 14Edit
Passage 3 Natural Science
- Philosophy of Science
- biology
- physics
- DNA
- Biological determist
Question 15Edit
Question 16Edit
Question 17Edit
Question 18Edit
Question 19Edit
Question 20Edit
Passage 4 Law
- Ronald Dworkin
- natural law
- legal positivism
Question 21Edit
Question 22Edit
Question 23Edit
Question 24Edit
I can NOT figure out why the answer is E here. Can anyone help??
Another reminder why reading a sentence for its full meaning is so important on the LSAT. Look at line 27. "According to Dworkin, this account is incompatible with the actual practice of judges and lawyers, who act as if there is a fact of the matter even in cases where there is no consensus. The theory he proposes seeks to validate this practice without falling into what Dwokin correctly sees as the error of natural law theory."
Reading the entire sentence gives you E, and helps on question 25 as well.
Question 25Edit
Question 26Edit
Section III Analytical ReasoningEdit
Question 01Edit
Question 02Edit
Question 03Edit
Question 04Edit
Question 05Edit
Question 06Edit
Question 07Edit
Question 08Edit
Can someone figure out why E is the correct answer for this question? I am having trouble making the deductions that make it logical that Z has a sunroof.
Question 09Edit
Question 10Edit
Question 11Edit
Question 12Edit
Question 13Edit
Question 14Edit
Question 15Edit
Question 16Edit
Question 17Edit
Question 18Edit
Question 19Edit
Question 20Edit
Question 21Edit
Question 22Edit
Question 23Edit
Question 24Edit
Section IV Logical ReasoningEdit
Question 01Edit
Question 02Edit
Question 03Edit
Question 04Edit
Question 05Edit
Question 06Edit
Question 07Edit
Question 08Edit
Question 09Edit
Question 10Edit
Question 11Edit
Question 12Edit
Question 13Edit
Question 14Edit
Question 15Edit
Question 16Edit
Question 17Edit
Question 18Edit
Question 19Edit
Question 20Edit
Question 21Edit
Question 22Edit
Question 23Edit
Question 24Edit
Question 25Edit
Question 26Edit
The materials adapted for LSAT.
- J. Madeleine Nash, "Fighting a Crippler." 1993 Copyright Time Inc.
- Robert J. Samuelson, "A Nation of Experts." Copyright 1995 by Newsweek, Inc.
- Anthony J. Sebock, "Judging the Fugitive Slave Acts." Copyright 1991 by The Yale Law Journal.
- Marilyn Yalom, Blood Sisters: The French Revolution in Women's Memory. Copyright by BasicBooks.