Questions 17-18

　　Jones： Prehistoric¹ wooden tools found in South America have been dated to 13,000 years ago. Although scientists attribute these tools to peoples whose ancestors first crossed into the Americas from Siberia to Alaska, this cannot be correct. In order to have reached a site so far south, these peoples must have been migrating southward well before 13,000 years ago. However, no such tools dating to before 13,000 years ago have been found anywhere between Alaska and South America.

　　Smith： Your evidence is inconclusive. Those tools were found in peat bogs², which are rare in the Americas. Wooden tools in soils other than peat bogs usually decompose³ within only a few years.

　　17. The point at issue between Jones and Smith is

　　（A） whether all prehistoric tools that are 13,000 years or older were made of wood

　　（B） whether the scientists' attribution of tools could be correct in light of Jones's evidence

　　（C） whether the dating of the wooden tools by the scientists could be correct

　　（D） how long ago the peoples who crossed into the American from Siberia to Alaska first did so

　　（E） whether Smith's evidence entails⁴ that the wooden tools have been dated correctly

　　18. Smith responds to Jones by

　　（A） citing several studies that invalidate Jones's conclusion

　　（B） accusing Jones of distorting the scientists' position

　　（C） disputing the accuracy of the supporting evidence cited by Jones

　　（D） showing that Jones's evidence actually supports the denial of Jones's conclusion

　　（E） challenging an implicit⁵ assumption in Jones's argument

　　19. Editorial： It is clear that if this country's universities were living up to both their moral and their intellectual responsibilities, the best-selling publications in most university bookstores would not be frivolous⁶ ones like TV Today and Gossip Review. However, in most university bookstores the only publication that sells better than Gossip Review is TV Today.

　　If the statements in the editorial are true, which one of the following must also be true on the basis of them？

　　（A） People who purchase publications that are devoted⁷ primarily to gossip or to television programming are intellectually irresponsible.

　　（B） It is irresponsible for university bookstores to carry publications such as Gossip Review and TV Today.

　　（C） Most people who purchase publications at university bookstores purchase either TV Today or Gossip Review.

　　（D） Many people who attend this country's universities fail to live up to both their moral and their intellectual responsibilities.

　　（E） At least some of this country's universities are not meeting their moral responsibilities or their intellectual responsibilities or both.

　　Questions 20-21

　　Saunders： Everyone at last week's neighborhood association meeting agreed that the row of abandoned and vandalized houses on Cariton Street posed a threat to the safety of our neighborhood. Moreover, no one now disputes that getting the houses torn down eliminated that threat. Some people tried to argue that it was unnecessary to demolish⁸ what they claimed were basically sound buildings, since the city had established a fund to help people in need of housing buy and rehabilitate⁹ such buildings. The overwhelming success of the demolition¹⁰ strategy, however, proves that the majority, who favored demolition, were right and that those who claimed that the problem could and should be solved by rehabilitating¹¹ the houses were wrong.

　　20. Which one of the following principles, if established would determine that demolishing¹² the houses was the right decision or instead would determine that the proposal advocated by the opponents of demolition should have been adopted？

　　（A） When what to do about an abandoned neighborhood building is in dispute, the course of action that would result in the most housing for people who need it should be the one adopted unless the building is believed to pose a threat to neighborhood safety.

　　（B） When there are two proposals for solving a neighborhood problem, and only one of them would preclude¹³ the possibility of trying the other approach if the first proves unsatisfactory, then the approach that does not foreclose the other possibility should be the one adopted.

　　（C） If one of two proposals for renovating¹⁴ vacant neighborhood buildings requires government funding whereas the second does not, the second proposal should be the one adopted unless the necessary government funds have already been secured.

　　（D） No pain for eliminating a neighborhood problem that requires demolishing basically sound houses should be carried out until all other possible alternatives have been thoroughly¹⁵ investigated.

　　（E） No proposal for dealing¹⁶ with a threat to a neighborhood's safety should be adopted merely because a majority of the residents of that neighborhood prefer that proposal to a particular counterproposal.

　　21. Saunders' reasoning is flawed because it

　　（A） relies on fear rather than on argument to persuade the neighborhood association to reject the policy advocated by Saunders' opponents

　　（B） fails to establish that there is anyone who could qualify for city funds who would be interested in buying and rehabilitating the houses

　　（C） mistakenly equates an absence of vocal public dissent with the presence of universal public support

　　（D） offers no evidence that the policy advocated by Saunders' opponents would not have succeeded if it had been given the chance

　　（E） does not specify the precise nature of the threat to neighborhood safety supposedly posed by the vandalized houses

上一篇：LSAT模拟试题：LSAT模拟试题TEST5逻辑2c 下一篇：LSAT模拟试题：LSAT模拟试题TEST5逻辑2e