PrepTest 133
[lcid:3628] Prep Test 133 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S1
Logical reasoning
Question prompt
Aerobics instructor: Compared to
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: B
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Must Be True Questions
Answer choices
-
ASkilled practitioners of kickboxing Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. While such injuries are "very likely" for beginners mimicking experts, that doesn't mean that the injuries aren't also likely for experts in general. There could be other ways that these actions lead to such injuries. -
BTo reduce the risk Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B matches the stem
Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts
Question Type:
Must Be True
Stimulus Summary:
Kickboxing is more dangerous than many other forms of exercise. Overextending when matching expert high kicks can lead to many injuries.
Answer Anticipation:
Two things to note here. First, the opening statement is a comparison, but it's very weak. Kickboxing is more dangerous than "many" other types of exercise, which is very weak. We have no idea what types of exercises fall into that safer category, so we should be wary of answers that are based on this statement.
The second statement, however, is much stronger—it's causal, and it has some force behind it ("very likely"). We should focus on that statement as we work through the answers, as we can draw some inferences about situations where the cause is or isn't present based on it.
Answer Explanation:
If matching the high kicks of experts leads to injuries, then avoiding doing that should reduce injuries. This answer highlights a unique aspect of causality compared to conditionals—if you reduce a cause, you should see a reduction in the effect, which is a form of a negation, but not illegal with this type of logic.
Key Takeaway:
Be careful of weak or non-specific comparisons on a Must Be True question. They can feel as if they support many answer choices that bring up things that don't necessarily fall into the category being compared. -
CBeginners at kickboxing aerobics Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. While trying to match expert high kicks is noted as a "very likely" source of injury, there are potentially others, as well. -
DKickboxing aerobics is more Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. While the Instructor does note that kickboxing aerobics is highly risky compared to "many" forms of exercise, there's no discussion of which forms those are. It's possible that non-high kicking exercises all fall into the quite dangerous camp. Additionally, this answer is about other types of aerobic exercise, whereas the comparison in the stimulus is to many forms of "exercise," further distancing that statement from this answer. -
EMost beginners at kickboxing Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. While those who attempt these kicks are "very likely" to injure themselves, that's not the same as saying that it's "very likely" anyone in these classes will injure themselves, which would be required to support this answer. It's possible that only a small subset try those high kicks, but almost all who do injure themselves.
What this tests
Discussion
-
Most strongly supported? 1 reply
Started by Tyler808
-
Started by nivensdc