Q20 - Antarctic seals dive to great

[Greatsk8erman]

This seems like a very simple one, I seemed to narrow it down to A and B, but my biggest problem with the LSAT seems to be choosing from the final two contestants. The only reason I picked choice A is because usually the answers on the weaken EXCEPT or strengthen EXCEPT questions are the ones that are completely irrelevant and don’t affect the conclusion at all. I cannot express my frustration enough on questions like this, I could argue until the end of the world why A seems like the correct answer, but somehow the answer is B. I already know when I say "Horses have nothing to do with it, therefore it doesn’t strengthen" you guys will say "it does because it has to do with storing oxygen in the spleen", but come on, are we talking about horses here who eat grass and live on farms, or are we talking about seals?? Any advice for me? I seemed to go back and forth and back and forth between choice A and choice B, but somehow I picked the wrong answer....

[Greatsk8erman]

I apologize for being so frustrated; I was just on the fence between a seal’s muscle tissue and a horse’s spleen, seal muscle tissue and a horse’s spleen, back and forth, confused as ever. If anybody could explain briefly the difference in relevance to this stimulus it would be greatly appreciated.

[giladedelman]

Don't apologize! I love the passion. Great post.

So, we know that strengthening an argument isn't the same thing as making an argument work perfectly. This difference is actually reflected in the question stem we're dealing with:

"Each of the following, if true, provides some support for the researchers’ hypothesis EXCEPT"

All we have to say about an answer choice to be able to rule it out is that it provides some support for the hypothesis that seals store oxygen in their spleens.

(A) meets this standard because it lets us know that it's at least possible to store oxygen in spleens. Yeah, it doesn't tell us anything about whether seals can do it -- maybe their spleens are too different from horses' -- but it definitely provides some support: spleen storage is possible. That's all we need.

(B), on the other hand, provides no support. Whether seals can store oxygen in their muscles doesn't affect whether they can do it in their spleens. Remember, that's what the argument is about: storing oxygen in seals' spleens, not storing it in general. We already know they store oxygen in their blood, so how would the fact that they store it in their muscles strengthen the idea that they use their spleens, too?

Does that assuage your mania a little bit? Be honest!

[Greatsk8erman]

The way you dissected the question stem makes perfect sense. I will admit that did make the question a little clearer. I don't have the question in front of me right now since I am at the library, but I believe that the argument was claiming that seals store oxygen in their spleens for a specific purpose if I can recall correctly. Oxygen being stored in muscle tissue has nothing to do with the authors argument on the [i]specific purpose[i] of the spleen, therefore it is pretty much irrelevant and does not strengthen it. I see in a whole new light now that you have broken it down for me. That helped me tons, because if such a small mistake like this goes unforeseen, its impossible to count how many more times it could happen in the future on similar questions. Thanks a lot!

[dylancox_12]

My question is this: If as you said, A doesn't do anything to tell us whether seals can store oxygenated blood in their spleen, then how in any way does it provide support to the hypothesis, when this hypothesis concerns whether seals can store oxygenated blood in their spleen?
You say that spleen storage is thus POSSIBLE under A, but it is possible for horses. Based on what information can we make the inference that since it is possible for horses, it is thus possible for spleens? This just doesn't feel like the type of inference or jump in logic we can do on the LSAT. I think if A said Humans are known to store oxygenated blood in their spleens, we wouldn't argue this supports a hypothesis that seals can do so. But is there any more connection between seals and horses, than between seals and humans?

[giladedelman]

I disagree! I think saying humans can do it would be just as good as saying horses can do it.

Imagine (A) said, "Some animals are known to store oxygenated blood in their spleens for use during exertion." Wouldn't you agree that that's helpful? To know that it's possible for at least some animals? That's all that this answer choice is really doing; whether you say horses, or humans, or whatever, the effect is to establish that it's possible among some animals -- as opposed to being impossible! It definitely helps the argument to know that it's not impossible.

Does that make sense?

[LSAT-Chang]

I disagree! I think saying humans can do it would be just as good as saying horses can do it.

Imagine (A) said, "Some animals are known to store oxygenated blood in their spleens for use during exertion." Wouldn't you agree that that's helpful? To know that it's possible for at least some animals? That's all that this answer choice is really doing; whether you say horses, or humans, or whatever, the effect is to establish that it's possible among some animals -- as opposed to being impossible! It definitely helps the argument to know that it's not impossible.

Does that make sense?

hello giladedelman!

i think your explanation for (A) and (B) could not have been better. having said that.. i was wondering if you could help me eliminate (E). I picked (E) because i saw it, then i thought "greater concentration?! sooo out of scope bye bye" so i eliminated it. how does containing greater concentrations of blood vessels strengthen it? is it because the second sentence tells us that they can store oxygen in their blood? so blood = blood vessels?? i need some extra study in science. I guess I am being "too" strict on these vocabs...

also kind of embarassing to admit, but i eliminated (B) because i thought there was something about spleen and muscle tissue that i didn't know about (i was thinking that maybe spleen = muscle tissue but i just don't know it, so saying that many species of seal can store oxygen directly in their muscle tissue seemed perfectly fine with me, haha since i never knew spleen had nothing to do with muscle tissue -- i guess they are very different?)

so overall these terms tripped me over in this problem i guess..

[giladedelman]

Thanks for the compliment! I'm glad the explanation helped.

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head. The argument actually tells us that seals store oxygen in their blood. So a greater concentration of blood vessels (which, yeah, means more blood) in their spleens does imply that they can store more oxygen in there. Be careful not to eliminate answers just because of vocabulary! An answer is only out of scope if it has no impact on the core, not just because it introduces a new term.

Also,

(C) strengthens the argument by suggesting the need for a storage unit apart from the blood and the lungs -- like the spleen.

(D) strengthens the idea that the spleen serves some purpose in long-diving animals.

Does that clear this one up for you?

[LSAT-Chang]

Thanks for the compliment! I'm glad the explanation helped.

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head. The argument actually tells us that seals store oxygen in their blood. So a greater concentration of blood vessels (which, yeah, means more blood) in their spleens does imply that they can store more oxygen in there. Be careful not to eliminate answers just because of vocabulary! An answer is only out of scope if it has no impact on the core, not just because it introduces a new term.

Also,

(C) strengthens the argument by suggesting the need for a storage unit apart from the blood and the lungs -- like the spleen.

(D) strengthens the idea that the spleen serves some purpose in long-diving animals.

Does that clear this one up for you?

Yes!! Thank you so much giladedelman! your explanations are always easy to understand, which helps a lot!!

[bearknowsthetrooth]

Am I the only one that picked A because the spleen contains some muscle tissue? I know this information isn't directly given in the passage, but it seems like less of a leap than assuming that horses and seals have anything to do with each other? I had a similar question about question 17 in this section, where we need to assume higher speed limit --> more traffic fatalities. Why can't we assume that the spleen contains muscle? I feel like it is pretty widely known that organs (ex. the heart) contain some muscle.

[joseph.carroll.555]

Am I the only one that picked A because the spleen contains some muscle tissue? I know this information isn't directly given in the passage, but it seems like less of a leap than assuming that horses and seals have anything to do with each other?I feel like it is pretty widely known that organs (ex. the heart) contain some muscle.

+1. Second question I got wrong in this section (the other being #12) that I vehemently disagree with the credited answer. It's also the second time I found someone else on here who had the exact same train of thought as me. In this question BKTT, you described it perfectly, especially the part about the organs such as the heart containing muscle.

Additionally, I still can't wrap my head around how a horse having the capability to store oxygen in its spleen strengthens the case that seals can store oxygen in their spleen. Does the fact that birds use their limbs to fly strengthen the hypothesis that pigs can use their limbs to fly?

[tommywallach]

Hey Guys,

So, always remember exactly what your core is:

Conclusion: Seals store oxygenated blood in their spleens.
Premise: Seals store oxygen in their blood.

Assumption: The gap here is clear. Does the oxygenated blood have to go to spleen? Of course not. The piece that you guys seem to be missing is that we don't even know if oxygenated blood can go to the spleen. Does the spleen have blood in it at all? Who knows?

(A) This definitely strengthens, because it lets us know that it's possible for an animal to store oxygenated blood in the spleen. We now know that blood GOES through the spleen and can be stored there.

Now, as for your complaints. I'll start with Joseph's. No, your pig example would not be particularly relevant, but that's because it's a little silly. Limbs and wings would be differentiated on the test. However, the fact that horses use their legs to RUN would strengthen the idea that other animals might use their legs to run. As I've said, the gap in the argument related to whether or not the spleen could even be used in this way. Now we know it can (and a spleen is a spleen is a spleen, just as a heart does more or less the same thing in every animal that has it).

Now, Bear'ss argument is a slightly better one. How do we know that (B) is NOT a strengthen, given that there could be muscle tissue in the spleen? I'd say two things for that. First of all, they're kinda being jerks, and expecting you to know. The heart does have muscle, yes, but that is common knowledge. Most of your other organs, which don't have to pump, do not have muscle.

The second issue is more straightforward. When you get to know your way around the LSAT (you've done twenty or thirty tests), you'll just know how they work. (A) is definitely a strengthen; it fits the pattern (mentioning spleens and oxygenated blood). (B) is irrelevant; we've never discussed muscle tissue.

Hope that helps clear things up!

-t

[deedubbew]

But does the spleen not contain muscle tissue? I even confirmed this with research on the internet. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2424311

[rpcuhk]

But does the spleen not contain muscle tissue? I even confirmed this with research on the internet. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2424311

The argument doesn't mention whether or not spleen contains muscle tissue. So we cannot make an assumption that spleen contains / or not contains muscle tissue.

[mornincounselor]

But does the spleen not contain muscle tissue? I even confirmed this with research on the internet. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2424311

The argument doesn't mention whether or not spleen contains muscle tissue. So we cannot make an assumption that spleen contains / or not contains muscle tissue.

Exactly. So then doesn't the question require us to have some outside knowledge related to the composition of the spleen? Which, I would argue, is exactly the type of outside information that the test shouldn't base the solution to a question upon.

[tommywallach]

No. It's not outside knowledge to not know something. If you don't know something, then the passage didn't say it, so it doesn't answer the question. We don't know if it supports the argument from what's written. Remember: it's all about what's in the passage. If you don't know it FROM THE PASSAGE, then you don't know it.

-t

[williamkazenas]

I, like many of the above, did not like not like the use of horses when the topic is Antarctic seals.

Honestly, the only reason I didn't choose A immediately and move on was because I simply don't trust the LSAT at all and A just seemed to easy.

Upon closer inspection you see that (A) horses known to store OXYGENATED blood in their spleens
(B) seals can store oxygen directly into its muscle tissue----done, wrong.

The stimulus says "but also store extra oxygen in their blood."

All the other answer choices mention oxygen storage in "blood" or talk about the "spleen" or "oxygenated blood"

There is no explicit mention of oxygen being stored in the blood in answer choice (B); it is the outlier.

I agree this is a cheap shot and assuming muscle tissue contains blood isn't that far of an assumption to make.
Hesitating to pick (A) on question 17 saved me.

[snoopy]

I agree with a lot of users' sentiment on answer choices A and B. I chose B because the spleen is an organ, and isn't it common sense to say that an organ has muscle tissue? That's what's so mind boggling about the LSAT. You do have to make common sense judgments about implications of some answer choices on some questions, but then you have questions like these that don't want you to use "common sense."

How does one differentiate between common sense and "common sense" (facts that aren't widely well-known)?

I even read the Manhattan Prep book explanation on this question, but I still am not understanding the strategy behind using "common sense." Did I just make an assumption that shouldn't have been made? i.e. spleen --> organ --> muscle tissue

[ohthatpatrick]

All organs are made from tissue, but not all organs are made from MUSCLE tissue.

So in (B)'s universe, we just know that seals can store oxygen in their muscle tissue.
Are they storing it in muscle tissue that makes up an organ?
Or are they storing it in muscle tissue that makes up a muscle?

We don't know. That's enough to make this answer of unclear value.

This answer, to me, reads more like it's Weakening the argument by providing an ALTERNATIVE hypothesis for how seals stay submerged so long. (B) could be saying, "Noooo, researchers, they aren't storing blood in their spleens, they're storing blood in their muscle tissue (within the muscles being used)!"

And if natural selection were going to find a way to store oxygen in the body for exertion, it seems like storing it in the muscles that are being used for the exertion is a plausible, conservative interpretation.

Your logic was
if spleen, then an organ, so involves (some form of) tissue.

But we need to get FROM this answer choice TO the idea of spleen. The way you're trying to use (B) would be thinking:
if I know it's in muscle tissue, I know it's in an organ (dubious move)
if I know it's in an organ, then I know it's in the spleen (dubious move)

Hope that helps.

[JigyasuP507]

AC A is in fact strengthening the argument, even if it’s giving little bit support but still it’s worthy to get rid of this AC.
Our task is make researchers hypothesis more likely. As it’s given that

for long dives these seals also store oxygenated blood in their spleens

.
According to me AC A is analogous to researchers’ hypothesis, horses are anologize with antartic seals and exertion is anologize with long dives and we know horses also store oxygenated blood.
So yeah it’s makes hypothesis more likely.
Hope that’d help!!