someone explains this?
Thanks
I was actually confused by the question stem...
LSAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- ohthatpatrick
-
Thanks Received: 3808
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 4661
- Joined: April 01st, 2011
Re: 16
If you're familiar with the Manhattan LSAT idea of "The Scale", or the central argument that is the basis for most passages, then this question is kinda just asking for The Scale.
It's a "Both Passages" problem, meaning we'll be able to justify our answer in both passages.
Saying that an author "placed a pair of concepts in opposition to each other" is basically saying that the author was stressing the give-and-take between these two concepts: if X and Y are in opposition to each other, then the more something is X, the less something is Y.
The Main Point / Most Valuable Sentence of Psg. A is lines 3-6. It places in opposition "treating research findings as commodities" and "the tradition and the role of research as a public good".
The rest of of Psg. A goes on to explain/support that idea.
The Main Point / Most Valuable Sentence of Psg. B is lines 38-41. This sentence also places in opposition the idea of pure science being a "public good" vs. "a market commodity".
The rest of Psg. B goes on to explain/support that idea.
(Most passages start off with a background claim or two and then pivot with a BUT / YET / HOWEVER / RECENTLY into the main focus / most valuable sentence)
So (C) is a good answer because it addresses The Scale of both passages and is (as I've just pointed out) supportable in both passages with line references.
=== other answers ==
(A) neither passage directly refers to commercially unsuccessful research, though both make some vague references to companies who profit off scientific discoveries
(B) neither passage makes a distinction between methods and results. They both make a distinction between what USED to happen with research results and what NOW happens with research results.
(D) psg. A doesn't mention discovery/invention at all. Psg. B says the lines between them are getting blurred, which isn't a great fit for "they are in opposition" to each other.
(E) neither passage draws a contrast between science and other inquiry.
Hope this helps.
It's a "Both Passages" problem, meaning we'll be able to justify our answer in both passages.
Saying that an author "placed a pair of concepts in opposition to each other" is basically saying that the author was stressing the give-and-take between these two concepts: if X and Y are in opposition to each other, then the more something is X, the less something is Y.
The Main Point / Most Valuable Sentence of Psg. A is lines 3-6. It places in opposition "treating research findings as commodities" and "the tradition and the role of research as a public good".
The rest of of Psg. A goes on to explain/support that idea.
The Main Point / Most Valuable Sentence of Psg. B is lines 38-41. This sentence also places in opposition the idea of pure science being a "public good" vs. "a market commodity".
The rest of Psg. B goes on to explain/support that idea.
(Most passages start off with a background claim or two and then pivot with a BUT / YET / HOWEVER / RECENTLY into the main focus / most valuable sentence)
So (C) is a good answer because it addresses The Scale of both passages and is (as I've just pointed out) supportable in both passages with line references.
=== other answers ==
(A) neither passage directly refers to commercially unsuccessful research, though both make some vague references to companies who profit off scientific discoveries
(B) neither passage makes a distinction between methods and results. They both make a distinction between what USED to happen with research results and what NOW happens with research results.
(D) psg. A doesn't mention discovery/invention at all. Psg. B says the lines between them are getting blurred, which isn't a great fit for "they are in opposition" to each other.
(E) neither passage draws a contrast between science and other inquiry.
Hope this helps.
2 posts Page 1 of 1