Top Law Schools

I have two strengthen questions.
PT54 sec4 Q20.

I don't understand how the answer would strengthen the argument. Isn't the answer just stating something that would be consistent with argument? What does the answer acheive by saying that it made more rain forecasts? I initially thought this was irrelevant because even if the meteorologist's station forecast rain more often than his/her competition that doesn't say anything about making accurate forecasts. The meteorologist's station could have just forecasted rain everyday. If that's the case that would not be helpful to his conclusion. (That his station is more reliable than others)

What am I suppose to be looking for in this question to get the right answer?

PT56 sec2 Q24

This one was a total blur to me. I didn't get the logic of the argument nor did I understand the answer.

The way I see it, the argument breaks down by the author first stating the number of lead seals from the early B. Empire that remain today. Then he talks about how there were a small amount of lead seals used for some special cases (I'm briefing this) and that most seals were used for documents that would be opened. Then he talks about how lead used for the latter case would be recycled. Then suddenly, (this is what I don't get) he says "THUS" the number of early B documents sealed in such a fashion must have been many times the number of remaining lead seals.

Wtf! Did the writer of the test intentionally make that huge gap there? Or am I missing something? How can someone possibly conclude that with what was given there? I blurred out right there when I was doing this section.

And because I don't understand the logic here I don't understand the answer. I don' see how this answer would "strengthen" the argument. To me it seemed like another statement that would be consistent with the argument, but then so is some other answer choices.

How would you analyze this? How am I suppose to approach this? Is this strengthen question a bit different from other strengthen questions (in that it should be approached differently) or is this just really hard?

This is a long one. But hope you can still help out!

fumagalli wrote:I have two strengthen questions.
PT54 sec4 Q20.

I don't understand how the answer would strengthen the argument. Isn't the answer just stating something that would be consistent with argument? What does the answer acheive by saying that it made more rain forecasts? I initially thought this was irrelevant because even if the meteorologist's station forecast rain more often than his/her competition that doesn't say anything about making accurate forecasts. The meteorologist's station could have just forecasted rain everyday. If that's the case that would not be helpful to his conclusion. (That his station is more reliable than others)

What am I suppose to be looking for in this question to get the right answer?

PT56 sec2 Q24

This one was a total blur to me. I didn't get the logic of the argument nor did I understand the answer.

The way I see it, the argument breaks down by the author first stating the number of lead seals from the early B. Empire that remain today. Then he talks about how there were a small amount of lead seals used for some special cases (I'm briefing this) and that most seals were used for documents that would be opened. Then he talks about how lead used for the latter case would be recycled. Then suddenly, (this is what I don't get) he says "THUS" the number of early B documents sealed in such a fashion must have been many times the number of remaining lead seals.

Wtf! Did the writer of the test intentionally make that huge gap there? Or am I missing something? How can someone possibly conclude that with what was given there? I blurred out right there when I was doing this section.

And because I don't understand the logic here I don't understand the answer. I don' see how this answer would "strengthen" the argument. To me it seemed like another statement that would be consistent with the argument, but then so is some other answer choices.

How would you analyze this? How am I suppose to approach this? Is this strengthen question a bit different from other strengthen questions (in that it should be approached differently) or is this just really hard?

This is a long one. But hope you can still help out!

PT54s4q20: The most important question for viewers in the area is whether it will rain. On most occasions, the meterologists station has been right (lets call this 51%, the bare minimum). The same cannot be said for their competitors. So to make it easy, call their competitor's rate of right being 49%.

Conclusion is the first sentence.

We now have 1/2 of the conclusion - the "more reliable" claim - taken care of. So maybe look for something that would show us that the ability is "more useful." Hypothetically, if they lived in the desert where it NEVER rained, the ability wouldn't be useful at all - who cares if you can predict rain better than someone else when neither station will ever make the prediction in the first place? Answer "A" takes care of this by indicating that not only are rain predictions made, but that our station does it more often than the competitors. This takes care of the "usefulness"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
pt56s2q24
This question is a lot like an assumption Q (even though it says strengthen).
A lead seal had served its purpose when the document was opened. Most lead seals were recast when they served their purpose. Thus there were a lot more documents once upon a time than seals remaining. We basically know from this that each seal got used more than once (ASSUMING the document was opened at some point, i.e. the seal had served its purpose)

If there were 40,000 byzantine documents sealed like this, but none of them were ever opened, then there would have only been 40,000 seals ever made. But if most of those documents were opened, then the lead would have been recast for the next 39,999 documents. So we still have 40,000 seals worth of lead, but now we have 79,999 byzantine documents. Repeat ad nauseum, and you get up to like 1,000,000 documents but with the same 40,000 seals worth of lead; Answer choice A being true therefore strengthens the conclusion.

I sort of understand your answer for pt56s2q24 (thanks for that!)
but I'm not very convinced with your answer for PT54s4q20. Saying that answer choice A concludes the usefulness of the station seems like bit of a stretch. (or maybe I just don't get it)

Can anyone add to this?

Bump for more help on the first question plz!

Hopefully this will make it more clear for PT54 sec4 Q20.

There's a gap in the argument. What if the station accurately predicts rain most of the time, but doesn't predict it at all many other times when rain comes? Yes, they have a higher accuracy rate, but maybe that's just because they predict rain when they see it coming - doesn't necessarily make them more reliable. Saying that the station in question forecasts rain more often than their competitors do provides more support that the station in question forecasts rain correctly more often than its competitors - which backs up the conclusion.

For Strengthen questions, plain and simple, it's all about identifying the conclusion and then checking the support provided in the stimulus to see where the gap is. Sometimes, it's harder to spot than others, like with this question. In that case, I move on to process of elimination of the answer choices. I think in this question (I recall having problems with it when I was prepping too) - (E) is also an attractive answer, but if you look at it closely, it doesn't strengthen the conclusion at all. (B), (C), and (D) are easily eliminated.

Also, I found this forum to be amazingly helpful when I was prepping for answering my questions about difficult LR problems (it's a beautiful thing): http://www.manhattanlsat.com/forums/