Logical reasoning PrepTest 120 · Section 1 · Question 6

Incorrect. We know that the earthquakes in question damaged the cities the high-rise buildings in question are located in, so distance shouldn't be a factor in the explanation here. That said, these pulses traveling farther would, if anything, increase the likelihood of damage being done, making the paradox worse.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Paradox

Stimulus Summary:
Computer models: Newly discovered displacement pulses are especially damaging to high-rise buildings
Yet: High-rise buildings in cities hit by powerful earthquakes weren't damaged

Answer Anticipation:
This question has a bit of a trick to it—once you're aware of it, you can look out for it in the future.

In Paradox questions, we're looking for an answer establishing how both sides of the paradox can be true. And that usually involves treating something stated by experts as true. This paradox seems to suggest that experts believe displacement pulses damage high-rise buildings, and yet we have examples of high-rise buildings that weren't damaged by these pulses.

However, there's a subtle shift that the LSAT has used a few times that's present here—the experts don't say that displacement pulses damage high-rise buildings. It's computer models that are saying that's the case. While computer models are built to reflect reality, they don't always take all variables into account. As such, they can reach false conclusions.

When an argument brings up computer models as the basis for reaching a conclusion, it's frequently the case that the computer models themselves are incomplete and don't reflect reality. Here, then, it's likely that the paradox will be resolved by highlighting that the computer models might be missing something.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights that computer models are wrong with some frequency. If that's the case, then those computer models predicting damage to the buildings would be missing something, as the reality is that high-rise buildings haven't been damaged by these displacement pulses.

Key Takeaway:
When a determination is based on a computer model instead of a study of reality, the LSAT frequently brings up the possibility that the computer model is off. Look out for this trick in any question that relies on computers!

Incorrect. This answer doesn't address the lack of damage found in high-rises during recent earthquakes, and we don't have any information about damage in older earthquakes, so this answer doesn't provide information that can resolve the paradox.

Incorrect. The earthquakes in question were "powerful," which presumably falls into the "strongest" earthquake category and not low- or medium-intensity.

Incorrect. This answer makes the paradox worse by stating that the computer models in this area have tended to be correct.