LSAT Test Exam Questions and Answers

QUESTION: 146

Parent: I had tried without success to get my young child to brush her teeth. I had hoped that she would imitate me, or that she would be persuaded by reason to brush her teeth. Then, I made a point of brushing her teeth for her immediately before reading her a story before her naps and at night. After several weeks, when I would pick up a storybook at these times, she began automatically to retrieve her toothbrush and brush her teeth herself.

The parent's experience with the child most closely conforms to which one of the following generalizations?

Children are most effectively taught to do something by someone's setting an example.
Children more readily adopt a behavior through habit and repetition than through other means.
Children are too young to understand rational arguments for adopting a behavior.
Children often imitate the behavior of others rather than listening to reason.
Children ordinarily act contrary to their parents' expectations in order to get more attention.

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

The question stem tells us to find the generalization that captures the parent's experience, so we're looking for a principle: an abstract account covering the situation at hand. In this case, imitation didn't work, reason didn't work, but making brushing part of her story time routine did the trick. Habit and repetition can be more effective than other means.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 147

The student body at this university takes courses in a wide range of disciplines. Miriam is a student at this university, so she takes courses in a wide range of disciplines.

Which one of the following arguments exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to that exhibited by the argument above?

The students at this school take mathematics. Miguel is a student at this school, so he takes mathematics.
The editorial board of this law journal has written on many legal issues. Louise is on the editorial; board, so she has written on many legal issues.
The component parts of bulldozers are heavy. This machine is a bulldozer, so it is heavy.
All older automobiles need frequent oil changes. This car is new, so its oil need not be changed as frequently.
The individual cells of the brain are incapable of thinking. Therefore, the brain as a whole is incapable of thinking.

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

Some students reported having trouble with this one on test day in December 1999. For some, it was because the logic struck them as correct, not "flawed" at all (even though the question stem is quite clear on that point).
"Hey," they protested, "the students there take a wide range of courses and Miriam's a student--she must take a wide range too!"
Nosiree! This is an example of a classic whole-to-part miscalculation. It is true of the student body taken in the aggregate that they take a wide range of courses. This doesn't have an impact on any one individual. It is eminently possible for a student, Miriam for instance, to take nothing but literature courses, and yet the generalization would remain true. So we're looking for a choice containing a similar error.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 148

Opponent of offshore oil drilling: The projected benefits of drilling new oil wells in certain areas in the outer continental shelf are not worth the risk of environmental disaster. The oil already being extracted from these areas currently provides only 4 percent of our country's daily oil requirement, and the new wells would only add one-half of 1 percent.
Proponent of offshore oil drilling: Don't be ridiculous! You might just as well argue that new farms should not be allowed, since no new farm could supply the total food needs of our country for more than a few minutes.

The drilling proponent's reply to the drilling opponent proceeds by

offering evidence in support of drilling that is more decisive than is the evidence offered by the drilling opponent
claiming that the statistics cited as evidence by the drilling opponent are factually inaccurate
pointing out that the drilling opponent's argument is a misapplication of a frequently legitimate way of arguing
citing as parallel to the argument made by the drilling opponent an argument in which the conclusion is strikingly unsupported
proposing a conclusion that is more strongly supported by the drilling opponent's evidence than is the conclusion offered by the drilling opponent

Answer(s): D

Explanation:

"Don't be ridiculous!" begins the proponent's reply to the opponent--no punches pulled here. The opponent of offshore oil drilling argues that drilling in certain areas is not worth the risk; these areas contribute only a small amount of oil overall to the country, and new wells there would contribute only a small percentage of that.
Obviously, the proponent doesn't agree that the new wells shouldn't be drilled simply because they will add very little to the country's oil supply. If that reasoning held, he argues, we wouldn't allow new farms, because no one farm is capable of feeding the entire country for long. The farm example is meant to sound ridiculous, and by extension imply that the opponent's reasoning regarding the new wells is ridiculous as well. Option [citing as parallel to the argument made by...] describes this method: The farm example is provided as a parallel argument, the implausibility of which is meant to highlight the "ridiculous" nature of the opponent's argument.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 149

Opponent of offshore oil drilling: The projected benefits of drilling new oil wells in certain areas in the outer continental shelf are not worth the risk of environmental disaster. The oil already being extracted from these areas currently provides only 4 percent of our country's daily oil requirement, and the new wells would only add one-half of 1 percent.
Proponent of offshore oil drilling: Don't be ridiculous! You might just as well argue that new farms should not be allowed, since no new farm could supply the total food needs of our country for more than a few minutes.

Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the drilling proponent's reply?

New farms do not involve a risk analogous to that run by new offshore oil drilling.
Many of the largest oil deposits are located under land that is Unsuitable for farming.
Unlike oil, common agricultural products fulfill nutritional needs rather than fuel requirements.
Legislation governing new oil drilling has been much more thoroughly articulated than has that governing new farms.
The country under discussion imports a higher proportion of the farm products it needs than it does of the oil it needs.

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

Now we get to debunk the debunker -- the proponent's implication that the opponent's argument is ridiculous ain't so hot after all, and perhaps you spotted the problem your first time through: The opponent doesn't pooh- pooh the new wells simply because of their measly output, but because such a small amount is "not worth the risk of environmental disaster." What's analogous to this risk in the proponent's farm example? Nothing. The proponent ignores this aspect of the opponent's argument. If, as option [New farms do not involve a risk analogous to that...] has it, new farms pose no such analogous risk, then the supposedly parallel example that's meant to refute the opponent's argument isn't parallel after all, rendering its implication meaningless. If option [New farms do not involve a risk analogous to that...] is true, the first line of the proponent's response can be thrown back at him.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 150

A running track with a hard surface makes for greater running speed than a soft one, at least under dry conditions, because even though step length is shorter on ' a hard surface, the time the runner's foot remains in contact with the running surface is less with a hard surface.
Which one of the following, if true, is evidence that the explanation given above is only a partial one?

Dry running conditions can be guaranteed for indoor track races only.
In general, taller runners have greater average step length than shorter runners do.
Hard tracks enhance a runner's speed by making it easier for the runner to maintain a posture that minimizes wind resistance.
The tracks at which the world's fastest running times have been recorded are located well above sea level, where the air is relatively thin.
To remain in top condition, a soft track surface requires different maintenance procedures than does a hard one.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

This question stem requires some translation. We're looking for something that, if true, would show that the author's explanation is only a partial one. So we're looking for a weakener of the explanation: something that points to another factor. Another way of thinking about this question is to recognize that the stem is telling you that the author is arguing that X (and only X) causes Y. You need to look for the answer choice that says Z also causes Y. The author's conclusion is that hard tracks are faster; the author says this is because the runner's foot is in contact with a hard surface for a shorter period of time. The correct answer choice will therefore give you another reason why hard tracks are faster. And that's what option [Hard tracks enhance a runner's speed by...] does. It tells you that hard tracks also make it possible for runners to minimize the effect of wind resistance, again making their times faster. If option [Hard tracks enhance a runner's speed by...].is true, then the author's explanation of why hard tracks are fast is only a partial explanation.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 151

Goswami: I support the striking workers at Ergon Foods. They are underpaid. The majority of them make less than $20,000 per year.

Nordecki: If pay is the issue, I must disagree. The average annual salary of the striking workers at Ergon Foods is over $29,000.

Goswami and Nordecki disagree over the truth of which one of the following statements?

The average annual salary at Ergon Foods is over$29,000.
Pay is the primary issue over which the workers are striking at Ergon Foods.
It is reasonable to support striking workers who are underpaid.
The striking workers at Ergon Foods are underpaid.
It was unreasonable for the workers at ErgonFoods to go on strike.

Answer(s): D

Explanation:

This is a Point-at-Issue question. Goswami concludes that the striking workers are underpaid. His evidence is that the majority of the workers make less than $20,000 per year. Nordecki counters that if pay is the issue then he disagrees with Goswami. Disagrees about what? In order to answer that question, look at the evidence Nordecki uses to disagree with Goswami. The evidence that he offers relates directly to the pay of the workers:
he says that the average salary is $29,000. So Nordecki must be disagreeing with Goswami on the issue of whether the workers are underpaid.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 152

Teacher to a student: You agree that it is bad to break promises. But when we speak to each other we all make an implicit promise to tell the truth, and lying is the breaking of that promise. So even if you promised Jeanne that you would tell me she is home sick, you should not tell me that, if you know that she is well.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the teacher's argument depends?

Most people always tell the truth.
It is sometimes better to act in a friend's best interests than to keep a promise to that friend.
Breaking a promise leads to worse consequences than does telling a lie.
Some implicit promises are worse to break than some explicit ones.
One should never break a promise.

Answer(s): D

Explanation:

On this question you needed to find the teacher's assumption. So that means you should have found the missing link between her conclusion and evidence. Her conclusion is that the student should not lie and say that Jeanne is home sick, even if the student had promised Jeanne that he would say that. The teacher supports this conclusion by saying that whenever we speak to each other we make an implicit promise to tell the truth, and lying is the implicit breaking of that promise. Did you see the double standard? The teacher concludes that the student should not break his promise to tell the truth to the teacher, even if that means breaking his promise to Jeanne. Therefore, the teacher must be assuming that it's OK to break some promises, but not others.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 153

Despite the fact that antilock brakes are designed to make driving safer, research suggests that people who drive cars equipped with antilock brakes have more accidents than those who drive cars not equipped with antilock brakes.

Each of the following, if true, would help resolve the apparent discrepancy described above EXCEPT:

Most cars equipped with antilock brakes are, on average, driven more carelessly than cars not equipped with antilock' brakes.
Antilock brakes malfunction more often than regular brakes.
Antilock brakes require expensive specialized maintenance to be even as effective as unmaintained regular brakes.
Most people who drive cars equipped with antilock brakes do not know how to use those brakes properly.
Antilock brakes were designed for safety in congested urban driving, but accidents of the most serious nature take place on highways.

Answer(s): E

Explanation:

Four viable resolutions, one clunker, states the stem. This tells us that the apparent discrepancy must not be a great mystery after all, considering there are four valid solutions to it right on the page. Our job is to find the odd man out. The argument is simple enough: Antilock brakes are designed for safety, but those who drive cars with these brakes have more accidents than those who drive cars without them.
Why? Each wrong choice posits a reasonable explanation of why this may be so.

Reveal Solution Next Question

Test Prep LSAT Test Exam (page: 19) Test Prep Law School Admission Test: Logical Reasoning, Reading Comprehension, Analytical Reasoning Updated on: 09-Feb-2026

QUESTION: 146

Explanation:

QUESTION: 147

Explanation:

QUESTION: 148

Explanation:

QUESTION: 149

Explanation:

QUESTION: 150

Explanation:

QUESTION: 151

Explanation:

QUESTION: 152

Explanation:

QUESTION: 153

Explanation:

Test Prep LSAT Test Exam (page: 19)
Test Prep Law School Admission Test: Logical Reasoning, Reading Comprehension, Analytical Reasoning
Updated on: 09-Feb-2026