#12 - People have long been fascinated by the paranormal

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)

The author argues that since evidence that might support the possibility of telepathy can simply be explained using known laws, it is premature to conclude that telepathy is an alternate means of communication.

The author's reasoning is basically sound. Since known laws explain the evidence we have, telepathy is not a necessary explanation. Therefore, it is basically sound to conclude that we should remain uncertain as to whether telepathy exists.

You are asked to identify the author's method, so you should focus on the fact that the author suggest that since we are not forced to accept telepathy, we should remain uncertain about it.

A good abstraction of this method of reasoning is "who ordered that," meaning that we should not jump to conclusions on the basis of evidence that can be explained in multiple ways.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. The author supports the conclusion that we should be uncertain about the existence of telepathy by pointing out that evidence is not adequate to force us to accept telepathy as real.

Answer choice (B) The author does not describe any experiments, so this choice is wrong.

Answer choice (C) The author's reasoning is basically sound, so this response is incorrect. The author discusses the general state of evidence, but does not generalize from any specifically mentioned evidence.

Answer choice (D) The conclusion is not only supported by the premises, it is quite probable given them.

Answer choice (E) This choice describes circular reasoning, which is not what the author did. The author started with evidence and worked toward a conclusion, which on the LSAT is not circular reasoning. On the LSAT, circular reasoning is when a principle basically identical to the conclusion is taken to be true from the outset, regardless of evidence, and you must be certain that the author started from the principle rather than from the evidence.

[salty]

Hi,

I chose (D) during the practice and got wrong. I came to understand why answer (A) works but still not very clear about why (D) won't work.

Is "However, it can often be shown that other explanations that do comply with known laws can be give" a support sentence for the conclusion, which is the last sentence of the paragraph?

Below is the original text of passage and answer choices and my analysis of each answer choice. Feedback, complements appreciated.

"People have long been fascinated by the paranormal..."

(A) supports the conclusion by pointing to the inadequacy of evidence for the opposite view. --> this is the correct answer and I figure the "inadequacy of evidence" refers to "However, it can often be shown that other explanations that do comply with known laws can be given."
(B) supports the conclusion by describing particular experiments -->incorrect, no experiment mentioned.
(c) supports the conclusion by overgeneralizing from a specific piece of evidence
--> incorrect, first of all, there isn't quite anything I would call as a "specific piece of evidence" from the passage and naturally no overgeneralization occurred either.
(D) draws a conclusion that is not supported by the premises
--> I chose this because the conclusion "Therefore, it is premature to conclude ..." is abruptly given without any relevant mentions or supports in the passage.
(E) rephrases the conclusion without offering any support for it.
--> incorrect, no conclusion was given in the first place to rephrase.

[Steve Stein]

Hi Sally,

That's a good question. As you alluded to, answer choice (A) properly describes the author's reasoning, which supports the author's conclusion by pointing out that there are often other explanations for claimed examples of telepathy.

Thus, we cannot say that the author's conclusion is entirely unsupported by the premises offered:

Premise: There are often other explanations for supposed "telepathy."

Conclusion: Thus, it is premature to conclude that telepathy is an alternative means of communication.

I hope that's helpful! Please let me know whether this is clear--thanks!

~Steve

[salty]

Thank you Steve,

I was confused because in the conclusion it talks about the relationship between telepathy and alternative means of communication, which was never mentioned in the passage. So I thought it was a gap in the logic where the conclusion is unsupported by the premise because no where in the premise (in the passage) was mentioned about communication. So I think this problem is one of those tricky kinds where you have to assume such vague relationship? I think everytime I come across this types of questions, I will have difficult times answering them correct even after thoroughly reviewing this question along with your explanation. But thank you for your answer.