PT54 section 1, Q6-Drilling fluids

existence1943
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:55 am

PT54 section 1, Q6-Drilling fluids

Postby existence1943 » Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:26 am

Hello! I have difficulty understanding why B is better than C.

The question: 'what is the primary purpose of the passages?'

B. Describe the general composition and properties of drilling muds
C. Points out possible environmental impacts associated with oil drilling

Passage B definitely talked about the environmental impact of drilling fluids discharging. The key is whether passage A talked about it or not. I think it did: line 23-25 --- 'One problem in studying the effects of drilling waste discharges is that .... ' I believe this part talked about drilling waste discharge was a problem. Although it did not specify that it was an environmental problem, in this context it's likely to be.

Could anyone help please?

Thanks in advance!

User avatar
eraserhead
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: PT54 section 1, Q6-Drilling fluids

Postby eraserhead » Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:48 am

Very few rc questions that are non inference based questions require that you have to make inferences or guess. In this case if there were no other answer choices that fit the question was asking for, you can maybe make a case based on what you interpreted that sentence/statement to imply.

But note that answer b references something that is a primary purpose in both passages. Remember you're looking for *a* primary purpose. Not *the*. You can find overwhelming evidence that both passages speak to B and the composition is *a* primary purpose of both. PT54 RC is tough!

bobloblaw21
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:36 am

Re: PT54 section 1, Q6-Drilling fluids

Postby bobloblaw21 » Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:45 am

C says POINTS OUT POSSIBLE IMPACTS associated with drilling. Even when passage A briefly touches on impact, it doesn't really POINT OUT possible impacts. If you imagine what that would sound like, it would be more like "it is difficult to study the effects of drilling waste discharges, but SOME POSSIBLE IMPACTS could include lowering biodiversity and contributing to disease in marine animals..." Or whatever. The point is, taking the language literally, the phrase you referenced does not point out ANY possible impacts. It discusses that there are, perhaps, impacts, but does not point out WHAT they are.

This is a tough comparative passage though, for sure.

existence1943
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:55 am

Re: PT54 section 1, Q6-Drilling fluids

Postby existence1943 » Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:40 am

eraserhead wrote:Very few rc questions that are non inference based questions require that you have to make inferences or guess. In this case if there were no other answer choices that fit the question was asking for, you can maybe make a case based on what you interpreted that sentence/statement to imply.

But note that answer b references something that is a primary purpose in both passages. Remember you're looking for *a* primary purpose. Not *the*. You can find overwhelming evidence that both passages speak to B and the composition is *a* primary purpose of both. PT54 RC is tough!


Thanks for the explanation!

While attacking this question I asked myself why the author of passage A wrote it? To just introduce the details of drilling fluids, or to state that it has negative environmental impact based on the knowledge of drilling fluids. I tended to believe in the latter. But C indeed was phrased in a way that needed some inference to make sense. That was where the struggle came from. I like the principle you pointed out:'Very few rc questions that are non inference based questions require that you have to make inferences or guess.' In situation like this, it can help to rule out the wrong answer.

Speaking of LSAT RC passages, typically, isn't it only one primary purpose for each passage?

existence1943
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:55 am

Re: PT54 section 1, Q6-Drilling fluids

Postby existence1943 » Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:44 am

bobloblaw21 wrote:C says POINTS OUT POSSIBLE IMPACTS associated with drilling. Even when passage A briefly touches on impact, it doesn't really POINT OUT possible impacts. If you imagine what that would sound like, it would be more like "it is difficult to study the effects of drilling waste discharges, but SOME POSSIBLE IMPACTS could include lowering biodiversity and contributing to disease in marine animals..." Or whatever. The point is, taking the language literally, the phrase you referenced does not point out ANY possible impacts. It discusses that there are, perhaps, impacts, but does not point out WHAT they are.

This is a tough comparative passage though, for sure.


Yeah. This is a good angle to rule out C as well. I guess I need to improve on handling subtlety of this kind.

Thank you!

User avatar
eraserhead
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: PT54 section 1, Q6-Drilling fluids

Postby eraserhead » Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:59 am

existence1943 wrote:
eraserhead wrote:Very few rc questions that are non inference based questions require that you have to make inferences or guess. In this case if there were no other answer choices that fit the question was asking for, you can maybe make a case based on what you interpreted that sentence/statement to imply.

But note that answer b references something that is a primary purpose in both passages. Remember you're looking for *a* primary purpose. Not *the*. You can find overwhelming evidence that both passages speak to B and the composition is *a* primary purpose of both. PT54 RC is tough!


Thanks for the explanation!

While attacking this question I asked myself why the author of passage A wrote it? To just introduce the details of drilling fluids, or to state that it has negative environmental impact based on the knowledge of drilling fluids. I tended to believe in the latter. But C indeed was phrased in a way that needed some inference to make sense. That was where the struggle came from. I like the principle you pointed out:'Very few rc questions that are non inference based questions require that you have to make inferences or guess.' In situation like this, it can help to rule out the wrong answer.

Speaking of LSAT RC passages, typically, isn't it only one primary purpose for each passage?


Usually you're asked to find *the* primary purpose so you're right. Being asked to find *a* primary purpose is pretty tricky. I thought the passage was tough overall and it's brutal that the cakewalk passage is in the same pt.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests