LSAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- jennifer
-
Thanks Received: 0
-
Elle Woods
- Posts: 91
- Joined: July 29th, 2010
Q11 - Between 1976 and 1985, chemical
WHY IS THE CORRECT ANSWER C RATHER THAN E, THANKS
-
- giladedelman
-
Thanks Received: 833
- LSAT Geek
- Posts: 619
- Joined: April 04th, 2010
- This post thanked 1 time.
Re: Q11 - Between 1976 and 1985, chemical
Thanks for posting!
All right, so we're looking for the one question whose answer wouldn't help us evaluate the representative's claim. What is his claim? It's that since these chemicals are known to cause mutations (premise!), the chemical wastes dumped in the bay must have caused these particular mutations, which occur in 3% of the fish in the bay (conclusion!).
(C) is correct because the answer to this question would have no bearing on the representative's claim. Why? Because his claim is about the cause of the deformations, not about the deformed fish's effect on the people who ate them! So whether the answer to this question is yes or no, that doesn't help us judge his claim that the chemical wastes caused the deformations.
(E), on the other hand, could help us evaluate the argument, so it's incorrect. If it turned out that there were other gene-altering pollutants present, for example, it may be that those, and not the chemical wastes, were the cause of the deformed fins.
(A) is incorrect because the incidence of deformity in fish unaffected by the chemicals is relevant in judging whether the wastes caused these deformities.
(B) is incorrect because if there was no increase, then it couldn't have been the chemicals' fault!
(D) is incorrect because if there are natural causes of the deformity, then maybe the chemicals weren't responsible.
Does that answer your question?
All right, so we're looking for the one question whose answer wouldn't help us evaluate the representative's claim. What is his claim? It's that since these chemicals are known to cause mutations (premise!), the chemical wastes dumped in the bay must have caused these particular mutations, which occur in 3% of the fish in the bay (conclusion!).
(C) is correct because the answer to this question would have no bearing on the representative's claim. Why? Because his claim is about the cause of the deformations, not about the deformed fish's effect on the people who ate them! So whether the answer to this question is yes or no, that doesn't help us judge his claim that the chemical wastes caused the deformations.
(E), on the other hand, could help us evaluate the argument, so it's incorrect. If it turned out that there were other gene-altering pollutants present, for example, it may be that those, and not the chemical wastes, were the cause of the deformed fins.
(A) is incorrect because the incidence of deformity in fish unaffected by the chemicals is relevant in judging whether the wastes caused these deformities.
(B) is incorrect because if there was no increase, then it couldn't have been the chemicals' fault!
(D) is incorrect because if there are natural causes of the deformity, then maybe the chemicals weren't responsible.
Does that answer your question?
2 posts Page 1 of 1