Cisco
CompTIA
ISC
EC-Council
EXIN
Fortinet
ITIL
Juniper
Microsoft
VMware
Avaya
SAP
Google
NVIDIA
Salesforce
Amazon
Palo Alto Networks
ISC2
Splunk
ServiceNow
All Vendors
  2. Home
  3. Exams
  4. Test Prep
  5. LSAT Test

Test Prep LSAT Test Exam
Law School Admission Test: Logical Reasoning, Reading Comprehension, Analytical Reasoning (Page 34 )

Updated On: 19-Jan-2026
Page 34 of 188
PDF with 934 Questions

The new agriculture bill will almost surely fail to pass, the leaders of all major parties have stated that they oppose it.

Which one of the following, if true, adds the most support for the prediction that the agriculture bill will fail to pass?

  1. Most bills that have not been supported by even one leader of a major party have not been passed into law.
  2. Most bills that have not been passed into law were not supported by even one member of a major party.
  3. If the leaders of all major parties endorse the new agriculture bill, it will pass into law.
  4. Most bills that have been passed into law were not unanimously supported by the leaders of all major parties.
  5. Most bills that have been passed into law were supported by at least one leader of a major party.

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

Sometimes the simplest arguments prove to be the toughest questions. The conclusion is that the new bill will almost surely fail to pass. The evidence is that the leaders of all major parties have stated that they oppose it.
In order to strengthen this argument, you need to find a statement that most accurately describes the situation in which this bill finds itself. In other words, you need to stay within the scope. Option [Most bills that have not been supported by...] says that most bills that have not been supported by even one leader (that's the same as our bill, which is opposed by leaders of all major parties) have not been passed into law (which is what our conclusion predicts--that the bill will fail to pass).



The folktale that claims that a rattlesnake's age can be determined from the number of sections in its rattle is false, but only because the rattles are brittle and sometimes partially or completely break off. So if they were not so brittle, one could reliably determine a rattlesnake's age simply from the number of sections in its rattle, because one new section is. formed each time a rattlesnake molts.

Which one of the following is an assumption the argument requires in order for its conclusion to be properly drawn?

  1. Rattlesnakes molt exactly once a year.
  2. The rattles of rattlesnakes of different species are identical in appearance.
  3. Rattlesnakes molt more frequently when young than when old.
  4. The brittleness of a rattlesnake's rattle is not, correlated with the length of the rattlesnake's life.
  5. Rattlesnakes molt as often when food is scarce as they do when food is plentiful.

Answer(s): E

Explanation:

More debunking -- this time of an old rattlesnake folktale. We cannot, in fact, tell the age of a rattlesnake by the number of its rattle sections, but only because these sometimes break off. The author concludes (note the Conclusion Keyword "so") that if these sections didn't break off, we would be able to tell the age of a rattlesnake by counting its sections. This would certainly make sense if we knew the precise amount of time it takes a rattlesnake to form a new section, and this interval never changed. But notice that we're told only that a new section appears every time a snake molts. How often is that? If it's variable, then the author's claim is bogus -- we wouldn't be able to tell the age simply from the number of sections. In order for the claim in the last sentence to hold up, we need to know that the intervals at which rattlesnakes molt are consistent. Note that we don't need to know the exact time of the molting periods -- only that there is an exact timing for this and that it doesn't change. So choice [Rattlesnakes molt exactly once a year.] is a red herring whereas correct choice [Rattlesnakes molt as often when...] relates to the real issue at hand: If molting time is variable depending on food availability, then the whole theory goes out the window. The author must therefore assume that no such molting variations occur.



Tony: A new kind of videocassette has just been developed. It lasts for only half as many vie wings as the old kind does but costs a third as much. Therefore, video rental stores would find it significantly more economical to purchase and stock movies recorded on the new kind of videocassette than on the old kind. Anna: But the videocassette itself only accounts for 5 percent of the price a video rental store pays to buy a copy of a movie on video; most of the price consists of royalties the store pays to the studio that produced the movie. So the price that video rental stores pay per copy would decrease by considerably less than 5 percent, and royalties would have to be paid on additional copies.

Anna's reply is structured to lead to which one of the following conclusions?

  1. The royalties paid to movie studios for movies sold on videotape are excessively large.
  2. Video rental stores should always stock the highest-quality videocassettes available, because durability is more important than price.
  3. The largest part of the fee a customer pays to rent a movie from a video rental store goes toward the royalties the store paid in purchasing that movie.
  4. The cost savings to video rental stores that buy movies recorded on the cheaper videocassettes rather than movies recorded on the more durable ones will be small or nonexistent.
  5. If the price a video rental store pays to buy a movie on videocassette does not decrease, the rental fee the store charges on the movie will not decrease.

Answer(s): D

Explanation:

Our next confrontation features Tony vs. Anna in a video debate. Tony asserts that video stores would make out economically if they bought and stocked movies recorded on the new kind of videocassette. The decreased lifespan of the new tapes, Tony reasons, is outweighed by their cheaper cost. Anna's reply, which is the focus of Q. 23, begins with the Contrast Keyword "But," so no doubt she takes exception to Tony's advice for the video stores. She points out that the cost of the videocassette is only a small fraction of the overall cost of buying a videotaped movie, the bulk of the expense residing in the royalty fee. Each time a tape wears out (and these new-fangled ones wear out faster than the older ones), a store incurs another royalty fee. It's not hard to see where Anna is going with this: The overall cost savings Tony touts will be very minimal, if they exist at all, because the area in which Tony's savings accrue represents only a tiny fraction of the overall cost.



Tony: A new kind of videocassette has just been developed. It lasts for only half as many vie wings as the old kind does but costs a third as much. Therefore, video rental stores would find it significantly more economical to purchase and stock movies recorded on the new kind of videocassette than on the old kind. Anna: But the videocassette itself only accounts for 5 percent of the price a video rental store pays to buy a copy of a movie on video; most of the price consists of royalties the store pays to the studio that produced the movie. So the price that video rental stores pay per copy would decrease by considerably less than 5 percent, and royalties would have to be paid on additional copies.

Which one of the following, if true, would contribute most to a defense of Tony's position against Anna's reply?

  1. The price that video rental stores pay for movies recorded on videocassettes is considerably less than the retail price of those movies.
  2. A significant proportion of the movies on videocassette purchased by video rental stores are bought as replacements for worn-out copies of movies the stores already have in stock.
  3. The royalty fee included in the price that video rental stores pay for movies on the new kind of videocassette will be half that included in the price of movies on the old kind.
  4. Given a choice, customers are more likely to buy a movie on videocassette than to rent it if the rental fee is more than half of the purchase price.
  5. Many of the movies rented from video rental stores, particularly children's movies, average several viewings per rental fee.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

Our familiarity with Anna's argument should now help us to turn the tables on her as we rush to Tony's defense.
Remember, the sticking point for Anna is royalties. If we can somehow get around that, or at least lessen the impact of the royalty fees, we'd be able to revive Tony's argument. And that's all the prephrase we need: Only one choice even mentions royalties, and it turns out to be the winner here. If, as option [The royalty fee included in the price that...] maintains, royalties on the new videocassettes are half that of the old, then the force of Anna's response would be severely weakened, and Tony's advocacy of the new tapes would once again seem reasonable.



Physician: Heart disease generally affects men at an earlier age than it does women, who tend to experience heart disease after menopause. Both sexes have the hormones estrogen and testosterone, but when they are relatively young, men have ten times as much testosterone as women, and women abruptly lose estrogen after menopause. We can conclude, then, that testosterone tends to promote, and estrogen tends to inhibit, heart disease.

The physician's argument is questionable because it presumes which one of the following without providing sufficient justification?

  1. Hormones are the primary factors that account for the differences in age-related heart disease risks between women and men.
  2. Estrogen and testosterone are the only hormones that promote or inhibit heart disease.
  3. Men with high testosterone levels have a greater risk for heart disease than do postmenopausal women.
  4. Because hormone levels are correlated with heart disease they influence heart disease.
  5. Hormone levels do not vary from person to person, especially among those of the same age and gender.

Answer(s): D

Explanation:

The question stem is just a wordy way of asking you to identify the logical flaw in the argument. This is a classic case of confusing correlation with causation. Just because X and Y appear together doesn't mean that X causes Y. Here the physician cites the evidence of high testosterone levels in younger men, and lower estrogen levels in post-menopausal women.
The physician then couples this with the fact that men get heart disease earlier, and women get it later, and finally concludes that testosterone promotes heart disease, and estrogen tends to inhibit disease. Looking at this evidence, you can agree that hormone levels and heart disease do seem to be correlated, but does that necessarily mean that these hormones promote or inhibit disease? Might there be other causes? Couldn't the correlation just be coincidence? Once you have identified this flaw (and it should come naturally after having read numerous causal arguments) you should be able to go quickly to correct answer choice [Because hormone levels are correlated...].



Viewing page 34 of 188
Viewing questions 166 - 170 out of 934 questions



Post your Comments and Discuss Test Prep LSAT Test exam prep with other Community members:

Join the LSAT Test Discussion