I just cannot see the answer for this one. I went for C, but it was shooting from the hip and I misfired. Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind this problem?
Thanks in advance.
Feb 1993 LSAT section 4 question 24 Forum
-
lot49
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 3:32 am
Re: Feb 1993 LSAT section 4 question 24
I actually don't have the original test but I have the Kaplan "Answers Explained" for some reason. So, I can't be anymore help than this, but here's the Kaplan explanation copied and pasted:
"24. (D)
The stem in Q. 24 offers two important pieces of information. First, we’re looking for an assumption, and second, we’re told what the argument entails: a “method... for
determining how quickly a new idea is taking hold.” As we read through the stimulus, we need to focus on this method and determine what assumption it relies on. The method is presented right off the bat. One way to find out how quickly a new idea is taking hold among people is to see how fast the words that describe the new idea pass into everyday language. The second sentence elaborates on this notion: We can tell when a word has passed into everyday usage by consulting experts, namely dictionary editors. So the notion underlying the method is this: If the vocabulary associated with a new idea has found acceptance, then so has the idea itself. Unless, of course, everyday usage of the vocabulary has changed its meaning. If the words originally associated with Idea X eventually attain everyday usage, but by that time mean different things than they used to, then one can’t argue that the appearance of these words signifies the acceptance of Idea X. If the words have passed into usage with altered meanings, then the connection between the words and the idea is severed and we cannot infer the popularity of the latter from the popularity of the former. In order for the method described to work, it must be assumed that no such distortion occurs along the way, as correct choice (D) points out.
(A) Just because the author describes dictionary editors as being vitally concerned with words that enter common usage, he needn’t assume that they aren’t professionally interested in lots of other things, such as choice (A)’s rarely used words.
(B) demands too much of the editors. They need only have an informed opinion about when new words have been accepted into everyday speech. They don’t have to have “exact numerical criteria.”
(C) The causality expressed in (C) runs counter to the proposed method. Dictionary editors follow new words to see if they become popular enough to be included in a dictionary. The method proposed by the author involves consulting dictionary editors to see if a new idea has taken hold, not using editors to help ideas take hold by including certain words in their dictionary.
(E), far from helping the argument, sinks it. If the words tend to be used before the ideas they represent are understood, then a word’s passing into everyday speech wouldn’t allow us to infer that the idea it represents has been embraced."
"24. (D)
The stem in Q. 24 offers two important pieces of information. First, we’re looking for an assumption, and second, we’re told what the argument entails: a “method... for
determining how quickly a new idea is taking hold.” As we read through the stimulus, we need to focus on this method and determine what assumption it relies on. The method is presented right off the bat. One way to find out how quickly a new idea is taking hold among people is to see how fast the words that describe the new idea pass into everyday language. The second sentence elaborates on this notion: We can tell when a word has passed into everyday usage by consulting experts, namely dictionary editors. So the notion underlying the method is this: If the vocabulary associated with a new idea has found acceptance, then so has the idea itself. Unless, of course, everyday usage of the vocabulary has changed its meaning. If the words originally associated with Idea X eventually attain everyday usage, but by that time mean different things than they used to, then one can’t argue that the appearance of these words signifies the acceptance of Idea X. If the words have passed into usage with altered meanings, then the connection between the words and the idea is severed and we cannot infer the popularity of the latter from the popularity of the former. In order for the method described to work, it must be assumed that no such distortion occurs along the way, as correct choice (D) points out.
(A) Just because the author describes dictionary editors as being vitally concerned with words that enter common usage, he needn’t assume that they aren’t professionally interested in lots of other things, such as choice (A)’s rarely used words.
(B) demands too much of the editors. They need only have an informed opinion about when new words have been accepted into everyday speech. They don’t have to have “exact numerical criteria.”
(C) The causality expressed in (C) runs counter to the proposed method. Dictionary editors follow new words to see if they become popular enough to be included in a dictionary. The method proposed by the author involves consulting dictionary editors to see if a new idea has taken hold, not using editors to help ideas take hold by including certain words in their dictionary.
(E), far from helping the argument, sinks it. If the words tend to be used before the ideas they represent are understood, then a word’s passing into everyday speech wouldn’t allow us to infer that the idea it represents has been embraced."
