## PT 48 LR

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
jbush53

Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:15 pm

### PT 48 LR

I have two questions about PT 48.

Section 1, #24. Can somebody explain why E is correct?

Section 4, #17. Can somebody explain why C is correct and D is NOT correct?

Thanks!!!

squ1rtle

Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:36 am

### Re: PT 48 LR

#24 - Flawed because it assumes everyone who is prepared to donate would also join, therefore making it impossible to reach the 30percent mark. If just 25percent of the 16percent of people prepared to donate did not want to join, it would make it possible to reach that 30percent support mark (26 + 25% of 16) thereby negating the conclusion drawn.
Last edited by squ1rtle on Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

squ1rtle

Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:36 am

### Re: PT 48 LR

#17 is flawed because it it bases its conclusion on the fact that since people can not control the weather they can not control the mosquito population. It ignores the factors that people can control that could decrease the mosquito population.

jbush53

Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:15 pm

### Re: PT 48 LR

squ1rtle wrote:#24 - Flawed because it assumes everyone who is prepared to donate would also join, therefore making it impossible to reach the 30percent mark. If just 25percent of the 16percent of people prepared to donate did not want to join, it would make it possible to reach that 30percent support mark (26 + 25% of 16) thereby negating the conclusion drawn.

This still doesn't make sense to me. How is it assuming that everyone who is prepared to donate would also join? Is the 16 percent included in the 26 percent? If we take the answer choice that some of the donators would not join the party, wouldn't this only decrease the 26 percent, making it harder to reach the necessary 30%? I don't understand how this is something the "argument fails to consider".

marsilni

Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 11:21 am

### Re: PT 48 LR

# 24 - I don't get this either.

bee's vision

Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:36 pm

### Re: PT 48 LR

#24 This is kinda tricky. The argument never explicitly says that the 16% and 26% cannot be added together to equal more than 30%, but when you focus on the conclusion its clear that he would have to assume that. "party not viable because most with less than 30% are not." E just points out that there's not enough information to make that assumption, that some of the 16% do not want to join the party but might donate money...so the party could very likely have over 30% support "either by joining or donating".

Pleasye

Posts: 8738
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm

### Re: PT 48 LR

My friend and I stared at #24 for like 15 minutes until she finally got it and explained it to me. That question sucked so much.

serdog

Posts: 302
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 8:21 pm

### Re: PT 48 LR

jbush53 wrote:I have two questions about PT 48.

Section 4, #17. Can somebody explain why C is correct and D is NOT correct?

Thanks!!!

C is correct because it speak to the outcome of high rates of X related to high rates of Y since we can't bring X down therefore we can not bring Y down. The concultion assumes that there however we my be able to use Z to bring Y down. D is incorrect because nothing states that X is only present i when Y is Present just worse
sorry did see that answer above

marsilni

Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 11:21 am

### Re: PT 48 LR

I get it now. I think the wordings of the stimulus and answers are a little confusing (perhaps on purpose?). I understood what was wrong with the argument, but translating that into an answer was the though part for me.

Return to â€œLSAT Prep and Discussion Forumâ€?

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests