Q3

[LSAT-Chang]

I thought this Q was really confusing because all the answer choices seemed similar to one another.

(A) - I guess it's the opposite since we are told that it grows super slow, not fast.

(B) - "one of the slowest known" is not mentioned.

(C) - this is not mentioned till the last paragraph.

(D) - is this wrong because we are not even told of this until the last paragraph? With these "primary purpose" type questions, do we just factor in what's in the paragraph? Or do we also have to consider the rest as well? I originally chose this one, but am not sure if it's wrong because we just have to focus on this paragraph and not the rest???

(E) - now that I look back.. I guess this makes the "most" sense out of all the answer choices..

But could someone clarify why (D) is wrong?

[noah]

Nice work, So!

In lines 29-30, we're told that some lichen grows quite slowly - and this is framed by "for example." It's an example of the statement in the preceding sentence that notes that "...lichen grows at a slow but constant rate..."

So, (E) makes sense - though it requires us to assume that 9.5 millimeters is not a lot! But, since it's an example, that's a safe assumption.

As for the wrong answers, it looks like you nailed them:

(A) is contradicted.

(B) is unsupported.

(C) is unsupported in this paragraph. We learn about that in the final paragraph.

(D) is unsupported. The last paragraph tells us about the ideal time frame, but we have no reason to connect that suggestion to the rate of growth of this lichen.

[LSAT-Chang]

Thanks Noah -- but a more general question I had was in regards to these types of questions was whether it would be safe to just look within that particular paragraph, or more broadly.

I understand that with "primary purpose" questions, it's definitely a synthesis type question since it is like the author's main point. However, when we are given a specific line reference and asked why the author wrote that, would it be ideal to just look around that line reference???

To elaborate on what I mean, I think there are 3 types of these questions in general:

1. overall primary purpose (need to understand the passage as a whole to answer this since it's like the author's main point)
2. primary purpose of a particular paragraph (you know those Qs where they ask what the first or second paragraph's purpose is)
3. purpose of a specific line reference

Let's say we had this brief passage:

P1 - many people say that the logic games section is the easiest among three sections on the LSAT. Some of these people finish the section so quickly that they have 10-15 minutes remaining when they are done. These same people claim that reading comp is the hardest out of all three sections.

P2 - some of the reasons given for why the logic games section are easier than reading comp are.....

P3 - other people say that the logic games section is in fact the hardest among all three sections on the LSAT and that the reading comp is actually much easier than logic games. These people claim...

P4 - however, when comparing the two, logic games does seem to be easier than reading comp because...

If we were given a question type of #2, and were asked "What is the primary purpose of the second paragraph in the passage?" a correct answer choice would be something like "to further elaborate on the argument posed in paragraph one." In this case, we have to look to paragraph 1 since that is what paragraph 2 is supporting. However, if we were given a question type of #3 and were asked a question like "What is the author's primary purpose of referring to the fact that some people have 10-15 minutes remaining when they are done with the logic games section?" then I'm not sure as to which of the two would be a better/correct answer:

(A) - to provide an example of a situation that supports an claim made by people in line 1

(B) - to support the author's argument that logic games is in fact the easier than reading comp.

As you probably would have noticed, answer choice (B) is sort of hinging on the argument paragraph 4 whereas answer choice (A) is solely focused on paragraph 1 (basically where the line reference came from). So I guess my question is how we are supposed to answer these types of question in particular. I would be tempted by (B), but looking at the correct answer of our original passage, answer choices (C) and (D) are wrong because like you said, we are not even told of that until the following paragraphs. So, in this case, would (B) be wrong because we don't even know what the author's argument is until the last paragraph? Does this make sense?

[noah]

You win for best question of the day!

I know exactly what you're saying. And, I'm afraid I don't have a silver bullet answer, but here's what I think:

Most of these questions, , i.e. >50%, are relying on the overall author's point. So, when in doubt, go for the answer that leans towards the author's side of the scale.

But, then there's a different flavor of this question, in which that part of the passage is used to make a counter-point, or a distinct sub-point (as in dismissing a counter-point).

A couple of keys to success with this sort of question are:

1. having a "passage map" in your head. One way to get this is to spend 10-15 seconds after reading a passage looking back and identifying each paragraph's role in the overall scale. If you're asked about something that supports the author's side, then probably this is a situation in which the part in question relates to the whole passage.

2. working wrong-to-right, deferring judgement if you have anything but a strong hatred for an answer.

Notice that in the question we're discussing, none of the wrong answers refer to the overall point of the passage--that lichenometry is better than radiocarbon dating for ...--meaning, you're not asked to choose between seeing the line in question as part of the author's big point or a sub-point. And, I believe this is usually the case with questions about the role played by a part of the passage when that part is not feeding directly into the main scale. In essence, you're not asked to choose, so no need to come up with an overall plan. Instead, you're asked to eliminate a bunch of answers, most of which are pretty bad. The tempting ones are references to sub-points made later on, and this is a trap answer you should be aware of.

I hope that helps. Now, go kill the LSAT - it deserves it.

[zainrizvi]

I don't think 3 is contradicted actually. The passage states in line 25 that lichens quickly colonize newly exposed rock surfaces.

(A) is a trap answer because it refers to the purpose of the first part of the sentence. If it had said "for example" to that part, then (A) would be correct. But it says "for example" to describe the slow, constant rate of lichen growth.

[mahamkhan0208]

Inference question - going beyond the apparent information and understanding the purpose behind a piece of text and derive other truths from it.

(A) Out of Scope- the rapidity of the growth of lichen colonies is not the primary purpose of the authors example in lines 29-30, instead the author wants us to focus on how the growth indicates the dating of past earthquakes when used in the Lichenometry method.

(B) Out of scope - we are not comparing various kinds of lichen species in the passage. (This answer introduces outside elements which are irrelevant.)

(C) Narrow Scope - relates to third paragraph of the passage, not lines 29-30.

(D) Narrow Scope - At this point in the passage, we dont know that the author argues that Lichenometry is better than radiocarbon dating. The use of the word “best” is also an incorrect degree modifier and an unsupported logical leap (who knows if it is the best method? There might be 10 other methods not mentioned in this passage. We only know that it is better than radiocarbon dating)


(E) CORRECT- this takes us back to the authors main point - how Lichenometry is a better method in dating past earthquakes. In order to date past earthquakes with the use of this method, a sense of the sort of timescale on which lichen growth occurs is essential.

[sahara]

Answer choice A is not referring to the rapidity with which the lichen grow. It says the rapidity with which they can establish themselves which is directly supported by Line 25. However the question asks about the "rate of growth".