as the title explains, please explain PT 58 section4 question number 23.
it has to do with causality, yes?????
thanks!!!
pt 58 section 4 #23 help Forum
- ScottRiqui
- Posts: 3633
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm
Re: pt 58 section 4 #23 help
(A) provides some evidence that the craters could be volcanic, but doesn't help to rule out meteorites as an alternate cause.
(C) and (D) both weaken the argument that the craters are volcanic.
(E) is irrelevant. It makes it unlikely that the craters were all caused by meteorites *from the same shower*, but the craters in question are all different ages, so no one's claiming that they were all caused by a single meteor shower in the first place.
(B) is relevant, since it tells that it's unlikely that eight meteorite craters would form a straight line, even if the meteorites hit at different times. This leaves volcanic activity as the only likely cause for the craters, which strengthens the argument.
(C) and (D) both weaken the argument that the craters are volcanic.
(E) is irrelevant. It makes it unlikely that the craters were all caused by meteorites *from the same shower*, but the craters in question are all different ages, so no one's claiming that they were all caused by a single meteor shower in the first place.
(B) is relevant, since it tells that it's unlikely that eight meteorite craters would form a straight line, even if the meteorites hit at different times. This leaves volcanic activity as the only likely cause for the craters, which strengthens the argument.
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 3:41 pm
Re: pt 58 section 4 #23 help
Thx!!
I especially like your analysis of (E) and why it's incorrect
I especially like your analysis of (E) and why it's incorrect
- ScottRiqui
- Posts: 3633
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm
Re: pt 58 section 4 #23 help
You're welcome.
(E) is a particularly good bit of "LSAT trickery" - it's an attractive answer because it does a great job of ruling out a possible alternate explanation, until you realize that the alternate explanation it's ruling out isn't the one that the passage was proposing.
(E) is a particularly good bit of "LSAT trickery" - it's an attractive answer because it does a great job of ruling out a possible alternate explanation, until you realize that the alternate explanation it's ruling out isn't the one that the passage was proposing.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login