PT 62, Section 4 LR, Q18 and 24 help Forum

[Oskosh]

Okay, so LR has always been my strongest section, but I despise how I will inevitably get one or two wrong (these being the ones considered the "hardest"). By the June test, I am hoping to at least score -0 on one section of the LR, but these questions are impeding that.

Can someone help me Q18 and Q24 in this preptest, and help me see their thinking process?

This is not a matter of simply reading up until a certain point and selecting an answer, but my not being able to understand the complexity.

For Q18, I selected e, thinking that this would complete the "unless condition" in the conclusion.

So conclusion:

If there are s beings on planets outside of our ss, we will not be able to determine this anytime soon unless they are as intelligent as humans.

Support: We won't be able to send spacecraft to Ps outside our SS anytime in the near future

-Any s being capable of communicating w/ us would have to be as intelligent as we are

D says if a S being can't communicate with us, theo nly way to detect its existence is by sending a spacecraft.

Premise says we can't, making the contrapositive -> only if they communicate with us.

I just don't really understand the connection between "unless... as intelligent as we are..." and the "capable of communicating with us." I don't know - strange argument.



24. I guess what confused me about this was my tendency not to select strong answers on the LSAT. Saying that they are imagining this correlation seems to be too strong of an answer, and so I thought that b - "MAY affect" - would be more suited as an answer. Essentially, they say the same thing, with C being a stronger choice.

[mornincounselor]

Post removed.

[Clyde Frog]

Okay, so LR has always been my strongest section, but I despise how I will inevitably get one or two wrong (these being the ones considered the "hardest"). By the June test, I am hoping to at least score -0 on one section of the LR, but these questions are impeding that.

Can someone help me Q18 and Q24 in this preptest, and help me see their thinking process?

This is not a matter of simply reading up until a certain point and selecting an answer, but my not being able to understand the complexity.

For Q18, I selected e, thinking that this would complete the "unless condition" in the conclusion.

So conclusion:

If there are s beings on planets outside of our ss, we will not be able to determine this anytime soon unless they are as intelligent as humans.

Support: We won't be able to send spacecraft to Ps outside our SS anytime in the near future

-Any s being capable of communicating w/ us would have to be as intelligent as we are

D says if a S being can't communicate with us, theo nly way to detect its existence is by sending a spacecraft.

Premise says we can't, making the contrapositive -> only if they communicate with us.

I just don't really understand the connection between "unless... as intelligent as we are..." and the "capable of communicating with us." I don't know - strange argument.



24. I guess what confused me about this was my tendency not to select strong answers on the LSAT. Saying that they are imagining this correlation seems to be too strong of an answer, and so I thought that b - "MAY affect" - would be more suited as an answer. Essentially, they say the same thing, with C being a stronger choice.

18. Manhattan LR forums have a solid explanation on this problem, so I won't go too far into this one. https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/foru ... t3873.html


24. This is probably the most commonly missed LR question on a very hard (-14 curve) test, so don't feel bad for missing it.

This is a complete the argument type question so the premise(s) will lead us to the correct answer.

Premise 1- says that researchers cannot find a correlation between pain and the weather.

Premise 2- those claiming a correlation gave widely different accounts of the pain intensity and weather. Basically those claiming a correlation didn't have much proof to back it up.

Conclusion- Both of these premises are centered around a correlation of pain and the weather that does not exist, so the correct answer should relate closely to this.


(B) is tempting because it somewhat supported by the information in the passage and the language it uses makes it seem like a safe choice. Also, be aware that we're also told about a varying time delay between weather and pain that this answer doesn't seem to work with.

(C) works because it much more closely related to two premises we're given. The study finds no correlation, yet people are convinced of a correlation when all information says otherwise. It's more likely that this correlation is imagined.


Prephrasing is the key to handling tough questions like these.