PT54 S2 Q8

vamos
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 2:50 am

PT54 S2 Q8

Postby vamos » Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:35 am

I narrowed the answer choices down to (A) and (B) and selected (B) because of time constraints. I don't see anything wrong with (B), any explanations?

Thanks

bhan87
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:08 pm

Re: PT54 S2 Q8

Postby bhan87 » Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:52 am

vamos wrote:I narrowed the answer choices down to (A) and (B) and selected (B) because of time constraints. I don't see anything wrong with (B), any explanations?

Thanks


B is much too strong because the statement says nothing about comparing the costs and benefits. The only thing it does is outline one benefit (less waste) and warns about one downside (possibility of erasure). You may be tempted to think that the latter is much more important, and thus want to conclude that this technology "may create more problem than it solves", but this comparison is not demonstrated in the statement. If, however, the statement were to add on a statement like "Often, the loss of documents negates the benefits gained by generating less waste, thus making it more harmful than good", then B could be justified.

vamos
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 2:50 am

Re: PT54 S2 Q8

Postby vamos » Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:20 pm

bhan87 wrote:B is much too strong because the statement says nothing about comparing the costs and benefits. The only thing it does is outline one benefit (less waste) and warns about one downside (possibility of erasure). You may be tempted to think that the latter is much more important, and thus want to conclude that this technology "may create more problem than it solves", but this comparison is not demonstrated in the statement. If, however, the statement were to add on a statement like "Often, the loss of documents negates the benefits gained by generating less waste, thus making it more harmful than good", then B could be justified.

This makes sense now. The stimulus never claims that technology creates MORE problems, just that it can be advantageous or disadvantageous in certain circumstances. Thanks.

User avatar
EarlCat
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 4:04 pm

Re: PT54 S2 Q8

Postby EarlCat » Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:28 am

It's actually pretty interesting what they have done here. The author uses a disjunctive "however" to signal the last sentence. Usually when authors use "however" or "but," they're indicating that they want you to ignore what they previously said and focus on what they're about to say.

Consider the following sentences, which are factually identical:

"You're not my type, but I really like you."
"I really like you, but you're not my type."


On one hand, in the LR section it would be a mistake to generalize that one fact trumps than the other--just like in OP's question we shouldn't assume that the danger of document destruction is more significant than the benefit of a lack of waste.

On the other hand, if this were the RC section and we were asked the author's likely view or the main point of the paragraph, it would be absolutely correct to take into account the emphasis the author implicitly gives to the latter statement: The author probably thinks the danger of document destruction is a big friggin' deal.

vamos
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 2:50 am

Re: PT54 S2 Q8

Postby vamos » Sat Jan 29, 2011 1:13 pm

EarlCat wrote:It's actually pretty interesting what they have done here. The author uses a disjunctive "however" to signal the last sentence. Usually when authors use "however" or "but," they're indicating that they want you to ignore what they previously said and focus on what they're about to say.

Consider the following sentences, which are factually identical:

"You're not my type, but I really like you."
"I really like you, but you're not my type."


On one hand, in the LR section it would be a mistake to generalize that one fact trumps than the other--just like in OP's question we shouldn't assume that the danger of document destruction is more significant than the benefit of a lack of waste.

On the other hand, if this were the RC section and we were asked the author's likely view or the main point of the paragraph, it would be absolutely correct to take into account the emphasis the author implicitly gives to the latter statement: The author probably thinks the danger of document destruction is a big friggin' deal.

This is great advice. I remember when I first read the stimulus I thought of it just like your example. Just like "I really like you, but you're not my type" would emphasize the "you're not my type", I interpreted the "technology is advantangeous in these circumstances, but disadvantageous in these circumstances" as implying that technology is disadvantageous. Answer choice (B) was the perfect trap answer choice for my interpretation.

I also find it interesting how you mentioned that my interpretation would be correct in RC, but not in LR. I would always approach both sections in the same manner, but after this problem, I will keep in mind to read LR slightly different than I would RC.

Thanks.

User avatar
EarlCat
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 4:04 pm

Re: PT54 S2 Q8

Postby EarlCat » Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:31 pm

vamos wrote:I also find it interesting how you mentioned that my interpretation would be correct in RC, but not in LR. I would always approach both sections in the same manner, but after this problem, I will keep in mind to read LR slightly different than I would RC.

Be careful though, because not all RC questions will treat it this way. If a question is about the point of the paragraph, I think the weight he puts on the latter statement counts, but it's not the only variable you have to consider. For instance, if we had paragraph that started identically to the LR question above, it would probably have another sentence or two following. Those also weigh in on the answer. If, for instance, the following sentences talked about document destruction, then we're probably pretty safe thinking the author doesn't care much about preventing waste. But if the rest of the paragraph talked about two experts, one who thinks preventing waste is important, and the other who thinks preventing document destruction is important, then the main point may be more neutral and not have as much to do with how the author phrased those first two sentences.

There are also questions such as, "Which of the following would the author most likely agree with?" whose answer choices contain factual statements. In those questions, often the credited response is the fact that was deemphasized because, even though the author downplayed it, he never indicated it was anything but true. The trap answers might be statements consistent with the emphasized point, but that go farther than the author actually did, or statements that contradict the deemphasized point (e.g. the lack of waste created by digital documents is not beneficial).




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cherrygalore, galeatus and 5 guests