PrepTest 132, Section 4, Question 3
A recent study of perfect pitch—the ability to(48 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(6 more words not shown)
- APeople who have(13 more words not shown)
- BAll of the(7 more words not shown)
- CPeople with perfect(12 more words not shown)
- DPeople with perfect(15 more words not shown)
- EPeople who have(17 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Families share more than genes. What if these families also share a house full of music?
A child with musical relatives might hear more music, get more lessons, or practice more often. That gives us another possible explanation for perfect pitch running in families. The study's pattern fits a genetic explanation, but it could also fit an environmental one. Finding the same ability in relatives doesn't tell us which explanation produced it.
What we’re looking for
We're asked to strengthen the genetic argument, so let's defend it against that objection. Evidence that these families don't get extra musical training would help. Identifying a gene responsible for the ability could also help, but we don't need such decisive evidence. An answer can strengthen the argument by removing one reasonable competing explanation.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
This addresses the training objection directly. People with relatives who have perfect pitch generally don't receive more musical training than other people. So we can't explain the family pattern simply by saying these people get more lessons.
That doesn't prove that genes are responsible. The families might share other environmental influences. But taking away one plausible alternative makes the genetic explanation better supported, which is all a strengthen question requires.
- B
The researchers' ability to identify musical notes doesn't establish why perfect pitch runs in families. What matters is whether their evidence separates a genetic explanation from alternatives such as a shared musical environment. Having perfect pitch themselves doesn't do that.
- C
Choosing music as a career could be a result of having perfect pitch. We're trying to explain how people got the ability in the first place, especially why relatives tend to share it. A career preference doesn't connect the family pattern to genes.
- D
This supports the competing explanation. If parents with perfect pitch make sure their children receive musical training, the children may acquire the ability through that training. Relatives would then share perfect pitch without the shared ability establishing a genetic cause. D matters, but it points against the argument we're supposed to strengthen.
- E
A connection between musical training and perfect pitch doesn't support a genetic cause. It could make us more interested in training as an alternative explanation. E doesn't establish that training causes the ability, and it doesn't tell us how much training the relatives received. Either way, it gives us no reason to favor genes as the explanation for the family pattern.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.