LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

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

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 8950
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#22647
Question #4: Method. The correct answer choice is (E).

The author argues that a baby’s babbling is a linguistic task. Why? Apparently, babbling babies open the right sides of their mouths wider than the left, unlike those who engage in nonlinguistic vocalizations—they tend to open the left side of the mouth wider. The argument is structured as follows:
Premise—Babbling babies open the right sides of their mouths wider.

Premise—During nonlinguistic vocalizations, people open the left side of the mouth wider.

Conclusion—Babbling is a linguistic task.
In prephrasing an answer to a Method of Reasoning question, it is important to keep an open mind: arguments can be described at varying levels of specificity, which is why your structural understanding of it should take priority over a narrowly prephrased description.

Answer choice (A): This answer choice is incorrect, because the scientist only evaluates evidence presented in support of her conclusion. No counterargument is ever discussed.

Answer choice (B): The scientist never questions the adequacy of a generally accepted principle, let alone undermine or replace it with another principle.

Answer choice (C): This is a half-right, half-wrong answer choice. Yes, the author raises a question and then describes an experimental test, but there is no reason to believe that the test was necessary to answer the question. Remember—Method of Reasoning questions belong to the Prove Family of questions, requiring the ability to prove the correct answer choice by referring to the information contained in the stimulus.

Answer choice (D): The author certainly describes an explanation for some facts, but the similarity between the author’s method of reasoning and answer choice (D) ends here. There is no debate over whether the explanation in question is, in fact, correct.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. In the first sentence, the author presents two possible interpretations (linguistic task vs. random sounds) of an observed phenomenon (babbling babies). The author then provides evidence in support of one interpretation (babbling babies is a linguistic task) and against the other. The fact that the conclusion is supported by two premises does not make this answer choice incorrect, as both premises can properly be summarized as “evidence” that babbling is a linguistic task.
User avatar
 crispycrispr
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: Apr 08, 2021
|
#86940
What's the other interpretation that the author offers against in choice (E)? I was choosing between (D) and (E), and I can see why (D) is right, but I was originally hesitant about the "against the other" part in (E) so didn't choose it.
User avatar
 Poonam Agrawal
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: Apr 23, 2021
|
#87045
Hi crispycrispr!
crispycrispr wrote: Sat May 08, 2021 5:14 pm I can see why (D) is right
Answer choice (E) is the correct answer to this question (might be a typo there in your post!).

"Against the other" refers to non-linguistic tasks (random sounds). If we break down answer choice (E), it says:

1. "two possible interpretations" = linguistic or non-linguistic
2. "evidence" = past studies
3. "support of one interpretation" = in support of linguistic
4. "against the other" = against non-linguistic

Let me know if this helps!
User avatar
 smtq123
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: May 28, 2021
|
#90963
Hi,

How providing evidence in favor of ONE side is treated as evidence against the OTHER side? I am unable to get this. Kindly explain.
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5387
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#91156
In general, that's a standard way of making any argument, smtq123. Evidence in favor of one explanation makes that explanation relatively more likely in comparison to other explanations, so it tends to undermine any opposing explanation. It may not be enough to disprove an opposing explanation, but as one explanation gets more likely, the other possible explanations become relatively less likely.

This is especially true when the two explanations are logical opposites of each other, like "linguisitc" and "non-linguistic." If there is evidence that something IS linguistic, that is also evidence that it is NOT non-linguistic, because the nature of that opposing pair is that nothing can be both things. It's like if I have evidence that you are in Chicago, that is also evidence that you are not somewhere other than Chicago. Evidence that a creature is extinct is evidence against the claim that it is still in existence. Etc.

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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