#24 - In Peru, ancient disturbances in the dark surface

[ChicaRosa]

I had a hard time understanding why C is correct?

I can see that he calls into question the interpretation about the Incas creating lines as land strips for space traveling aliens but I don't see another interpretation he supports. Am I missing something?

Thank you!

[Robert Carroll]

Chica,

The third sentence indicates that the investigator is interpreting the lines as landing strips. That is the investigator's interpretation. In order to support that, the investigator asks some rhetorical questions that call into question an alternative interpretation of the lines as roads.

I hope that is clear!

Robert Carroll

[onlywinter]

Hi,

This is in regards to question #49 of Method of Reasoning in the Powerscore LSAT Logical Reasoning I book.

I was in between A and C.

Why is C right? The answer assumes an alternative where multiple explanations could exist.

In regards to A, what does "direct" mean exactly here? I can't figure out why this one is wrong.

[Brook Miscoski]

Winter,

You have stated why (C) is correct. The stimulus presents two possibilities--the Inca Road, or Alien Landing. The "investigator" claims that the Inca Road theory is silly, so it must be....Aliens!!!

You can eliminate (A) because it says "reject out of hand." That would mean that the investigator just dismisses a claim without considering it. However, the investigator gives three reasons he doesn't believe the Inca Road possibility--the pattern is too neat, it's a weird pattern, and it's in the middle of nowhere.

You can also eliminate (A) by referring to "direct counterevidence." In context, "direct" would mean information that is clearly supportive of the Inca Road theory (the one that is counter to the Alien Landing theory). For example, Inca pottery near the road, or the discovery of a lost Inca city or village connected to the road. The stimulus doesn't present any evidence that would clearly support the Inca Road theory, so there isn't any direct counterevidence for the investigator to reject.

I think it's easier to eliminate (A) for the first reason I stated. The trick is to focus first on an answer choice's general claims to see if there is an easier reason for disposing of it. However, you can eliminate it for either reason.

[onlywinter]

Brook, thank you so much for the thorough explanation. I realized why I didn't choose C. As someone who studied Latin and knows that "alter" means "the other," i.e. admitting of only two possibilities, I assumed that the English alternative meant "one of two options" in the same way the Greek-derived dilemma refers to a problem with only two possible solutions. Apparently, modern English dictionaries state that an alternative means one of 2 or more options. I had assumed that the answer, by containing the word "alternative", contained a false dilemma and therefore could not be right.

I'm glad we cleared that up. Thanks again for the help!

[askuwheteau@protonmail.com]

Good afternoon,

Here I believe the question stem is asking me to challenge a statement which would support the notion that the line patterns served unrelated purposes. In this case, my pre-phrase would tell me I'm looking for an answer which may indicate that the lines patterns are indeed related in some way. My testing analytics is showing me that Choice B is the correct answer (see attached screenshot), yet in my readings of the forum responses re this question, it appears that C is the correct answer. Here's my logic as to why I believe C is the correct answer

A: Irrelevant

B: Irrelevant

C: The Correct answer as it shows the lines are related, not separate

D: Irrelevant

E: Irrelevant

Is my thought process re this question correct?

Thx,

Jonathan

[Dana D]

Hey Jonathan,

The correct answer for this question is (C), however the same stimulus information is used in both questions 24 and 25 of this LR section, and the correct answer for #25 is (B). I think your analytics might be showing the correct answer for #25, as that is a Strengthen question, while this one is a Method of Reasoning.

[askuwheteau@protonmail.com]

Hi Dana,

Thank you for the prompt reply. I am confused as to why this question could be regarded as a method of reasoning question. It does not appear to contain a question stem asking for how the author arrived at his/her conclusions, but rather this stimulus in #24 appears to be asking me to Counter (aka Weaken) an objection pertaining to the line patterns serving unrelated purposes . In attempting to counter this objection, Choice C is the best fit as it shows the opposite, namely that the lines were serving related purposes.

Would you please clarify why you view this question as a method of reasoning passage?

Thanks,

Jonathan

[EmilyOwens]

Hi Dana,

Thank you for the prompt reply. I am confused as to why this question could be regarded as a method of reasoning question. It does not appear to contain a question stem asking for how the author arrived at his/her conclusions, but rather this stimulus in #24 appears to be asking me to Counter (aka Weaken) an objection pertaining to the line patterns serving unrelated purposes . In attempting to counter this objection, Choice C is the best fit as it shows the opposite, namely that the lines were serving related purposes.

Would you please clarify why you view this question as a method of reasoning passage?

Thanks,

Jonathan

Hi Jonathan,

This is not only a Method of Reasoning question, but a Method of Reasoning — Argument Part question. This is because the question stem cites a specific statement from the stimulus and asks you to find the answer choice that correctly describes the role that statement plays in an argument. In this case, we are required to determine the way in which the investigator goes about defending their argument that the light-colored lines weren’t Inca roads. While the question is worded in a convoluted way (i.e. “what’s the argumentative strategy”), it’s really just asking “The method of the investigator’s argument is what?”

To further clarify, the question stem can be swapped out with other classic Method of Reasoning question structures such as:

“Which one of the following describes the investigator’s technique of reasoning”
“The investigator’s argument employs which of the following reasoning techniques” and
“The investigator’s argument seeks to do which of the following”

I hope this helps!

[askuwheteau@protonmail.com]

Thank you for the explanation.