Hi All,
Can someone please explain these questions. Questions 22 and 23 have the same stimulus but apparently I don't fully understand it. The answers are A, D and B resepectively. Thank you very much!!
PT 26, Section 3, Questions 18, 22 and 23 Forum
-
KaplanLSATInstructor
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 5:53 pm
Re: PT 26, Section 3, Questions 18, 22 and 23
Q. 18 is definitely not straightforward. The stimulus offers an unusual discrepancy: when a stingray lacks parasites, the stingray itself tends to be healthier, although somehow it also indicates a stressful environment.
While it makes sense that a stringray lacking parasites would be healthier, the real question is why would it also indicate a stressful environment? The correct answer should explain how parasites could indicate the environment.
(A) does that by saying that the parasites also need hosts (e.g., shrimp and oysters) that can't thrive in harsh environments. If a stingray had parasites, then there would have to be the necessary shrimp and oysters nearby -- making it a relatively calmer environment. If the environment was stressful, then the parasites couldn't live there because there wouldn't be the shrimp and oysters. So, the stingrays would have no parasites (making the stingrays okay), but they would be swimming in a harsher environment. So a lack of parasites can mean good news for the stingrays -- bad news for the surrounding area.
For Q. 22 and 23, you have to pay attention to the logic of Kay's principle. Let's say there are numerous candidates, and she disagrees with them on various important issues. If she disagrees with one candidate on fewer issues than each other candidate, then it is acceptable to vote for that one candidate. Otherwise (i.e., if she disagrees with another candidate on the same number or fewer issues), it is unacceptable.
For Q. 22, the correct answer, (D), plays off this principle. If she disagrees with every candidate on the same number of issues, then there is no acceptable candidate. A candidate is acceptable if she would disagree with every other candidate on MORE issues. If she disagrees with them all equally, there is no candidate with whom she disagrees with more than any other. According to her principle, that makes them all unacceptable.
For Q. 23, we look at the three specified candidates: L, M and N. In this election, there is one important issue to Kay. Only M shares Kay's opinion, which means she disagrees with L and N on this issue. So, she disagrees with M on no important issues and she disagrees with N and L on one issue each. For M, she disagrees with every other candidate on more issues, so it is acceptable to vote for M. For N and L, she disagrees with another candidate (M) on fewer issues, so it is unacceptable to vote for them.
Only (B) is correct.
HTH
- Chris
While it makes sense that a stringray lacking parasites would be healthier, the real question is why would it also indicate a stressful environment? The correct answer should explain how parasites could indicate the environment.
(A) does that by saying that the parasites also need hosts (e.g., shrimp and oysters) that can't thrive in harsh environments. If a stingray had parasites, then there would have to be the necessary shrimp and oysters nearby -- making it a relatively calmer environment. If the environment was stressful, then the parasites couldn't live there because there wouldn't be the shrimp and oysters. So, the stingrays would have no parasites (making the stingrays okay), but they would be swimming in a harsher environment. So a lack of parasites can mean good news for the stingrays -- bad news for the surrounding area.
For Q. 22 and 23, you have to pay attention to the logic of Kay's principle. Let's say there are numerous candidates, and she disagrees with them on various important issues. If she disagrees with one candidate on fewer issues than each other candidate, then it is acceptable to vote for that one candidate. Otherwise (i.e., if she disagrees with another candidate on the same number or fewer issues), it is unacceptable.
For Q. 22, the correct answer, (D), plays off this principle. If she disagrees with every candidate on the same number of issues, then there is no acceptable candidate. A candidate is acceptable if she would disagree with every other candidate on MORE issues. If she disagrees with them all equally, there is no candidate with whom she disagrees with more than any other. According to her principle, that makes them all unacceptable.
For Q. 23, we look at the three specified candidates: L, M and N. In this election, there is one important issue to Kay. Only M shares Kay's opinion, which means she disagrees with L and N on this issue. So, she disagrees with M on no important issues and she disagrees with N and L on one issue each. For M, she disagrees with every other candidate on more issues, so it is acceptable to vote for M. For N and L, she disagrees with another candidate (M) on fewer issues, so it is unacceptable to vote for them.
Only (B) is correct.
HTH
- Chris
-
msw099
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 2:19 am
Re: PT 26, Section 3, Questions 18, 22 and 23
Thanks Chris. I greatly appreciate the detailed answers!
