PrepTest 143, Section 1, Question 13
Dr. Khan: Professor Burns recognizes that recent observations(39 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(7 more words not shown)
- AIf the recent(23 more words not shown)
- BContrary to Professor(9 more words not shown)
- CProfessor Burns's claim(9 more words not shown)
- DThe recent observations,(22 more words not shown)
- EThe poor conditions(7 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Failing to see something again doesn't automatically show that the first sighting was mistaken.
Perhaps something obstructed the view. Perhaps poor conditions made the telescope's view unclear. In either case, a comet reservoir could still be there even though the new observations failed to show it. Those are possibilities illustrating the problem, not facts about what obstructed these particular observations.
Burns treats the lack of confirmation as enough to reject the earlier observations. Khan points out that the recent conditions were poor. That gives us a reason to question Burns's certainty.
What we’re looking for
It doesn't establish that the earlier observations were right. Maybe they were mistaken too. We can leave that question open while concluding that Burns hasn't justified her rejection. For the supported statement, I want that criticism of her inference, not a verdict about whether the reservoir exists.
Working the answers
- A
We don't know what observations under good conditions would have shown. They might have confirmed the reservoir, or they might have provided evidence against it. Questioning observations made under poor conditions doesn't guarantee a particular result under better ones.
- B
Khan accepts that the recent observations fail to confirm the earlier ones. The disagreement is over what follows from that failure. Saying the new evidence doesn't disprove the old evidence is different from saying it confirms it.
- CCorrect
Burns claims that nonconfirmation is enough to show the earlier observations were incorrect. Khan's point about poor conditions challenges that implication: the recent failure to see the reservoir may reflect the conditions rather than an error in the earlier observations. Her conclusion goes beyond what this evidence establishes.
- D
This also makes a claim about observations under good conditions. Perhaps those would be strong enough to cast doubt on the earlier observations. Khan's objection concerns the poor conditions that actually occurred; it doesn't settle what better observations could establish.
- E
Worthless is much stronger than inadequate for Burns's conclusion. An observation might provide limited information without being sufficient to settle whether the reservoir exists. Khan challenges the weight Burns puts on these observations, not every possible use or value they could have.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.