Section 2, #24, of the June 2007 LSAT is a hell of a lot easier than it might look. The facts are fairly straightforward: car companies use survey data and direct interaction with buyers to figure out what car consumers want, and “designer interaction with consumers is superior to survey data.” Okay, fine. The difficulty arises when we get to the question part:

“The reasoning above conforms most closely to which one of the following propositions?”

What’s that supposed to mean?

Continue reading ‘June 2007 LSAT, II, #24’ »

Section 2, #22, of the June 2007 LSAT presents us with a loose, but reasonable, causal chain of events: First, the media does a shitty job of covering politics. Simultaneously, politicians conduct their business in secret. The result of these two things is that citizen action is less likely to influence politics. And the result of THAT, in turn, is that citizens lose interest in politics.

I think that’s basically what’s happening here. There are TWO initial causal factors (bad media and government secrecy), and one end result: people give up on politics.

The question asks us “Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the editorialist’s statements.” I am not, by nature, a conservative.  But I’m going to pretend I’m conservative when I’m answering this question.

Continue reading ‘June 2007 LSAT, II, #22’ »

For once, a well-reasoned argument.

Question 18 in Section 2 of the June 2007 LSAT concludes “it is remarkable that very few researchers find evidence that global warming is unlikely.”  Why is this remarkable?  Well, global warming is “widely accepted,” and there are hundreds of researchers striving to break through, and nothing attracts recognition more than overthrowing conventional wisdom.  THEREFORE, it’s remarkable that the researchers aren’t finding anything.  This makes sense.

The question says “The information above provides the most support for which one of the following statements.”  The LSAC, in its typically clunky way, calls this type of question “Identifying a Position that is Conclusively Proven by the Information Provided.”  That’s too much of a mouthful for me, so let’s just call this question type “Must Be True.”  I’m shocked that we’ve made it all the way to Question 18 in this section before seeing one of these, because they’re extremely common.

Continue reading ‘June 2007 LSAT, II, #18’ »