Explanation for December 2009 questions Forum

[becauseimaddicted]

Don't worry, I am not about to post the questions.

But, having retaken and gone through the December exam extensively, I have found that there are still a handful of questions that I do not understand the right answer.

I know there are no explanations for these questions from Kaplan or anyone, but is there place that I might find one? Or is anyone willing to discuss questions from the December exam via email?

[becauseimaddicted]

thanks, aether.

Second LR section, #21 (E vs C) and #24

[aether]

Second LR section, #21 (E vs C)

Ah yes; the infamous QWERTY question!

I make no claim to be an LSAT expert, but I can tell you why I didn't like choice C. We are looking for an inference that can be drawn from the historian's statements. He says that the QWERTY keyboard layout was designed to solve a particular problem: jamming up the keys on early typewriters.

Answer choice C misses the mark. Even if those early inventors had known that their keyboard design would someday cause us problems, they still had an immediate problem of their own to solve. The keys on their typewriters were jamming up, and they needed a solution. Would they have proposed the QWERTY keyboard anyway, despite the future troubles it would cause? Answer choice C suggests they would have found some other (hypothetical) solution to their immediate problem... but what would that solution have been? <shrug> I dunno. Maybe they would have proposed QWERTY anyway.

Answer choice E is comparatively clear. If the keyboard had been designed for computers in the first place, there would have been absolutely no reason to design it to limit typing speed.

and #24

This is a "find the flaw" question, so the first thing to do is read the prompt and look for the flaw. Please consider the following argument:

-- Astronomers once believed that the Sun and all planets orbited around the Earth;
-- However we learned that the Earth and planets really orbit around the Sun;
-- THEREFOR it is impossible to ever understand orbital mechanics.

Silly, right? The fact that one theoretical framework was disproved doesn't mean you can never find a correct one! It just means that particular theory was wrong or incomplete.

With that in mind, look again at the question prompt. It contains the same flaw. From the fact that one theory of aesthetics was incomplete, they falsely conclude that no complete theory can ever exist.

So we are looking for an answer choice that basically says: "even though that theory was proved wrong, a better theory could still come along someday." That is answer choice E, which says that a more-encompassing (i.e. more complete) theory of aesthetics could exist.

Does that answer your questions?

[becauseimaddicted]

Those both make a lot of sense, thank you!!

Also a little baffled on RC #1 and #20. Anyone?