LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 LustingFor!L
  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: Aug 27, 2016
|
#38053
Please confirm my reasoning below is correct:

Narrowed down to A and C which both toyed with the idea that resources could actually be renewable. Ultimately chose C after ruling out A, because it challenged a premise in the argument. While correct answer C, challenged the conclusion.

Thank you!
 AthenaDalton
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 296
  • Joined: May 02, 2017
|
#38382
Great question!

Your approach is a good one -- an argument which attacks the conclusion is often stronger than one that merely attacks a premise.

Here, answer choice (A) is particularly ineffective at attacking the argument since the stimulus already accounts for this weakness. The stimulus says that "many economically useful raw materials" are non-renewable, and their absence will prevent people from accomplishing what they now do with those materials. Answer choice (A) merely states that "some economically useful resources" are renewable. The stimulus already concedes that "many" important resources are non-renewable. This clearly indicates that at least "some" important resources are renewable. So answer choice (A) doesn't have much of an impact on the argument.

I hope this makes sense! :) Good luck studying.
 chiickenx
  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: Apr 30, 2019
|
#66464
Hi, can someone please check my Blind Review explanations? Its not the most formal of explanations, just my thoughts... In any case, my main concern about this question is that while I got it correct, i just have issues with it... which leads me to a further question. To elaborate, please look at (C) below.

A. Okay, this doesn't do anything… what about the materials that aren’t…? that's the main focus of the argument… for example, consider bronze. The conclusion that if all the bronze runs out, people will be unable to accomplish what they now accomplish despite, hypothetically, iron being a renewable material still stands…

B. The level of difficulty is irrelevant to whether or not it is possible for people to accomplish what they could not accomplish. Thus, the conclusion regarding the impossibility of people accomplishing what they now accomplish still stands…

C. I guess... if bronze be replaced, it is unclear whether people would be unable to accomplish what they now accomplish… however, i take issue with this AC because philosophically speaking… they wouldn’t be able to accomplish what they now accomplish. For example, suppose we run out of bronze. In a case such as this, we would never again be able to make bronze swords, or bronze shields, etc. We would only be able to make iron swords and iron shields... thus, it is true that we would never again be able to accomplish what we now accomplish if the nonrenewable material runs out.

But then again... if we are strictly philosophically speaking, we would NEVER be able to reproduce an accomplishment: Suppose you forged King Arthur's Excalibur. If you attempt to accomplish this feat again, you would not be forging the Excalibur; but rather, you would have forged a sword with the same type of material, design, etc. that resembles Excalibur.

As such, on the LSAT i feel like sometimes we have to philosophically think and sometimes we do not have to philosophically think. When do we draw the line? That is when is it proper to philosophically think and when is it improper? The main reason why i chose (C) was because all the other ACs suck. Not because it is a good AC.

D. Idc about the worthiness of accomplishment something is... i care about the possibility...

E. Right… so in a few hundred years people wouldn't be able to accomplish what they are able to accomplish now… so wtf... this doesn’t do anything…

Thanks ahead of time!
User avatar
 KelseyWoods
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1079
  • Joined: Jun 26, 2013
|
#66650
Hi Chiicken!

Your reasoning as to why answer choices (A), (B), (D), and (E) are incorrect is spot on--great job at eliminating those losers!

So let's talk a bit about your issues with answer choice (C). First, you note that the main reason you chose this answer choice is because the other answer choices suck. That's a perfectly valid reason to choose an answer choice! Remember that our goal is always to choose the best answer of the 5 choices provided. That sometimes means that the correct answer will end up being an answer choice that we don't really like, but it's still better than all the other options we have. This is why eliminating incorrect answer choices is just as important a skill as recognizing a correct answer choice. And it served you well on this question--you figured out the correct answer because you recognized why all of the other answer choices had to be incorrect! Great job!

But I know it always feels better to really understand why a correct answer choice is correct, so let's talk through your reasoning a bit about this answer choice. I agree that the LSAT is conducive to overthinking. Unfortunately, I can't give you a precise line to tell you when you're thinking an appropriate amount vs. when you're overthinking. You get a bit of a natural feel for that the more LSAT questions you do, but sometimes you need to rely on other skills to help you out (like eliminating incorrect answers!).

With this answer choice specifically, it does tell us that the renewable substitutes would be "functionally equivalent," which basically tells us that they would function in the same way, thus allowing us to accomplish the same things. With your example, if we run out of bronze, we won't be able to make bronze swords or bronze shields, but we'd still be able to make swords and shields. I think your example with bronze might have caused you to focus more on specific products rather than on a broader idea of accomplishments. Try thinking about it in terms of energy sources. If we run out of coal, we won't be able to power our electricity using coal anymore. But we'll still be able to create electricity using other resources, like wind power. So we can't accomplish "coal powered electricity" anymore, but we can accomplish electricity. So the idea is that you can do the same thing, just using another material. We can still create swords and shields without bronze. In this case, narrowing our definition of accomplishments to be based on the material used (e.g., "bronze shields," "coal powered electricity"), is going past that "overthinking line" :)

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey
 andriana.caban
  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: Jun 23, 2017
|
#72146
Hi!

I eliminated (A) because I thought it was an opposite answer, or shell answer. The author says "economically useful materials" while the answer choice says "economically useful resources". Am I over reading the answer choice? (Of course, I also eliminated because of the use "some" which is less than "many" like users above have described).

I'm just wondering if my analysis was too rigid of A. Thank you!
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5387
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#72374
I think you may be over-thinking this one, andriana. The difference between "raw materials" and "resources" is not an important distinction here. The problem with answer A is that the stimulus is about the resources that are NOT renewable, and answer A is about some that ARE renewable. It's just talking about the wrong stuff! We need an answer that indicates that we might be able to keep on doing the things that we are currently doing with our nonrenewable resources. That either means that the supply will always be higher than the demand, or else that we will be able to do those things, whatever they are, some other way after the resources run out. The fact that some other tasks are being done with renewable resources isn't relevant to the discussion.

Here's an analogy:

My wife drives a 1965 Rambler American. You simply cannot get newly manufactured original manufacturer parts for this car any more, so eventually, as the car breaks down over time, she will be unable to get it repaired.

What would weaken that? Maybe I can get replacement parts custom made, or buy new parts manufactured by a third-party source other than the original manufacturer. That's answer C.

Would it matter that parts are still being made by Ford Motor Co. for my Ford Fusion? Nope, that has no bearing on what will happen to my wife's Rambler. That's answer A.
User avatar
 sdb606
  • Posts: 78
  • Joined: Feb 22, 2021
|
#86267
I still have a problem with C. Here's the conclusion:

people will eventually be unable to accomplish what they now accomplish using those materials.
My prephrase was: "Find an answer that shows that people can continue to use non-renewable materials despite them running out." I was looking for an answer to mention recycling.

What's wrong with that prephrase?
 Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1819
  • Joined: Dec 06, 2013
|
#86912
sdb,

I don't think there's anything wrong with that prephrase. I'm not sure what that has to do with answer choice (C), though. No answer seems to match the prephrase. That just reflects that fact that something that would answer the question might not appear in any answer choice. If your prephrase had appeared in an answer, I think that answer would have been correct. It just wasn't offered. So you have to evaluate the answer choices based on which one ALSO answers the question.

Robert Carroll
User avatar
 Snomen
  • Posts: 35
  • Joined: Sep 30, 2021
|
#90912
Correct me if I am wrong, to attack this question I used conditional logic from the conclusion.
/obtained--->/accomplish
accomplish--->obtained
So, from here we just need to show that:
accomplish and /obtained
What answer choice C is actually doing.

Hope my reasoning is Ok :-D
 Rachael Wilkenfeld
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1419
  • Joined: Dec 15, 2011
|
#90915
Exactly Snomen.

When our stimulus gives us a conditional rule, we can easily weaken it by breaking that conditional rule. If the conditional says we must obtain the materials off Earth, then showing we really can achieve our goals in a different way.

Great analysis.

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.