#25 - Global Reference, Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=12412)

The correct answer choice is (C)

This Global Reference question requires you to understand the author’s viewpoint, although the answer is difficult to prephrase, but the correct answer choice will be the one that passes the Fact Test and can be confirmed by the passage.

Answer choice (A): The author makes no reference to the need for better optical equipment in future experiments, so this choice is unsupported by the passage and should be eliminated.

Answer choice (B): The passage does not suggest that such explanations “generally fail.” Rather, the author presents two explanations, one of which the author explicitly believes to be unsatisfactory. Since this choice is too broad to be supported by the passage, it cannot be the right answer to this Must Be True question.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. In the final paragraph of the passage, the author states that part of the motivation for the front-to-back explanation is the scientific desire in general to separate the phenomenon from the observer. Since this is the only answer choice that passes the Fact Test, it is confirmed as the correct answer to this Must Be True question.

Answer choice (D): In the third paragraph, the author provides that people are accustomed to dealing with mental constructs of object, but makes this statement about people in general and does not say anything about its dependence on people’s training in science.

Answer choice (E): The author does not say that dealing with our mental constructs interferes with a clear understanding of how our primary perceptions function. Rather, the author points out that mirrors are the exception to a generally reliable equation between our senses and our mental constructs. This does not involve understanding how our perceptions function, so this choice should be eliminated.

[15veries]

Hi,

I kind of have a general question...
So question like this, how do we know which paragraph we should go back to read?
It's not an opinion of anybody, so it's kind of hard to find the lines...
What should we do for those questions?
Do we need to read the whole passage again?

[Claire Horan]

Hi 15veries,

A question like this requires an in-depth understanding of the passage as a whole, so it won't suffice to go back and look at particular parts of the passage. I suggest, instead, that while you are reading the passage the first time you read actively, reacting to the author's attitudes and viewpoints. Try to paraphrase what you are reading as you go. Slow down if the words are difficult or the sentences are convoluted. And, of course, use VIEWStamp to annotate the passage. If you do all of these things as you read, you will end up with a much better comprehension of the passage as a whole, allowing you to distinguish contenders from losers. Once you have a contender, try to explain to yourself, using evidence that you remember from the reading, why the author would indeed agree with the answer choice. If you can't explain why, try another contender.

[avengingangel]

How in the heck does C pass the Fact Test? The passage clearly states: (lines 45-47) "Scientists like to think that what mirrors do should be explainable without reference to what the observer does." So..the author is saying that Scientists generally don't take into account the observer.. which is the opposite of what answer C tell us.

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Hi avengingangel,

Go back and take a look at lines 43-47 or so, and then re-read X. I think you misread either those lines or answer C; they actually say exactly what C is saying! This might have just been a case of reading a bit too quickly and so misconstruing it. C is saying physicists separate the phenomenon from the observer, and 43-47 says the same thing.

[chzhou]

How is it that everywhere I look on this problem, no one addresses the glaring issue with C?!?!?! The passage says "SCIENTISTS" and the answer choice says "PHYSICISTS." "Scientists" includes way more than "physicists." In fact, this sort of applying a characteristic of a whole to a part of that whole is a crime in the LSAT LR.

When when when do I break these rules??? Please someone help!

I'm sorry this sounds so rude but I'm really on my last straw with this test! Every rule you have to follow gets broken somewhere else. I've given up looking for the right answers! It's just whatever I'm left with. I haven't been able to justify any answer in the tests from this decade!

[James Finch]

Hi CH,

The Whole-to-Part flaw is a little bit tricky, in that it doesn't mean that anytime a characteristic of a group is applied to a member/subgroup, it is a flawed premise. Instead, if something is true of all or almost all members of a group, then applying that characteristic to an individual member/subgroup can be justified. Here, we are given something that is true of all scientists (how they think about mirrors) and asked to apply that principle to a subgroup (physicists), which works because the author is claiming the characteristic to be true of all scientists, including physicists. The correct answer choice could have been about biologists or chemists, because they are all included in the umbrella group of scientists.

Hope this helps!