June 2018 LSAT Section 3 Question 19

Henry: Engines powered by electricity from batteries cause less pollution than internal combustion engines. Therefore...

Mazen on July 7, 2022

Further clarification Please of A

Hi, Here's why I eliminated A: Umit states: "Battery-powered vehicles have very short ranges and must be recharged often," emphasis on "very short ranges." And answer-choice A states that the power plants are at a "significant distance from major cities." I bring your attention to the contrast between "very short ranges" and "significant distance from major cities." For A to be correct, I felt that I have to add my own assumption, which is a BIG NO NO, and the assumption I have to add is that "the significant distance" from major cities is still within the "short ranges" of the capacity of the battery-powered cars. Absent this assumption of mine, answer-choice A becomes impractical and should therefore be eliminated. Worse I was convinced that might help Umit's over Henry, because the "standard battery-powered cars" would not be able to make it to the power plants given their electric charge won't accommodate the significant distances to the electric power plants. Although I was uncomfortable with B, I felt that it is much stronger because if it offsets the pollution, meaning reduces its own pollution to zero, whether it is in urban areas or somewhere else, it would still dilute the pollution within the major cities. Let's be clear, it is not uncomfortable to assume that in today's age when we talk about pollution from car emissions we're talking about pollution that does not stop at the borders! So reducing it somewhere will ultimately decrease it elsewhere, especially within driving distance! This question, is the only question that I feel is not one where we choose the best answer. I feel that the LSAT writers are testing for something specific, technical as if we have to recognize to leave commonsense behind on this one!

Replies

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Emil-Kunkin on July 9, 2022

Hi Mazen,

I think there is a much simpler explanation here- and one that would not force us to assume that the cars with short ranges are able to drive to power plants far outside of cities. Perhaps instead, power generated very far from cities is then transmitted via wires into those cities.

This is, of course, how pretty much every power station in the world works. You don't drive your toaster to a power station to toast bread, you don't have to take an ebike to a power plant to recharge it, and you don't need to drive to a power plant to recharge an electric car. Rather, power generated in power plants often hundreds of miles away from cities is moved to those cities via wires.

We are allowed to make this sort of common sense assumption. Anyone who has lived in an electrified world (which is the vast majority of people) would be familiar with the idea that power is transmitted from power plants, rather than forcing people to drive to those power plants to get power.

Mazen on July 10, 2022

Hi Emil,

Considering your comments - "much simpler explanation," "this is, of course, how pretty much every power station in the world works," "common sense assumption," and "Anyone who has lived in an electrified world (which is the vast majority of people) would be familiar" - and considering that I am a member of the "vast majority of people" that have lived in an electrified world, it clear that I failed to make the common sense assumption.
(By the way this is not surprising to the people closest to me, LOL :-))

Please don't misread the tone of my response, I am very hard to offend (and I am laughing at myself; "the toaster" example is great!!!)

I do not know why but I for some reason I analogized the power plants to gas stations; and the stimulus conjured up in my mind the picture of electricity stations instead of gas stations; power plants are gas stations but with electricity instead of gas to fill up your vehicle LOL!!!!

I am very sorry for my frustrating interpretation, but if it makes you feel any better I am equally, perhaps even more, frustrated with myself.

In retrospect, in my mind, it was few electric stations replacing gas stations, only the electric stations (or "power plants" per my false interpretation) are in the context of answer-choice A "confined to a small number of locations and are at significant distances from major cities"!!!

I loved your response. All your feedback is immensely helpful and I hope you continue to help me get better!

Thank you very much Emil.
Mazen

Emil-Kunkin on July 11, 2022

Hi Mazen,

The line of reasoning you describe makes much more sense- I think this question might be a great example of something I call the "professor test." Imagine you are telling your interpretation to a well rounded smart person, perhaps a professor, smart friend, or someone similar who you respect. If you would be less than confident in your interpretation, then you should reassess your reasoning. I use this as a tool to check myself if I am overthinking (which happens quite often).

This is not by any means a silver bullet (and when it hinges on the misinterpretation of one term, such as charging station/power plant it is less useful), but I find it quite useful to get out of my own head for a second and make sure that I haven't overcomplicated something that is not all that complicated- as I often do. Essentially, I use this to be critical of my own reasoning.

This is actually a great misinterpretation, because I think it showcases a clear example of where the professor test could be helpful. I also apologize if my tone came off as dismissive- I thought you may have misread a term or part of an answer choice, but wasn't sure where, and wanted to state why not A in the clearest terms.

Mazen on July 12, 2022

Hi Emil,

First, thank you so much for your help.

Second, please, you do not not need to apologize, and your tone did not come off as dismissive; not at all.

Also, in your recent post you put your finger on something important I do tend to overcomplicate or overthink things. Your recommendation, to get out of my head and employ "the professor test," though is not a silver bullet, is a great advice.

(By the way, in this case, I truly do not know how electric power plants would work on cars; I see at big chain stores, like Whole Foods, these parking spaces with electrical charging units that have handles that look like the handles for gas stations. That's probably where I got my line of reasoning from.)

Finally, I know explaining these skills is intellectually taxing, and I appreciate you for not ignoring me, and for your continuing consistent feedback.

Your comments/examples are great. So thank you Emil, and please keep them coming!

Mazen

Mazen on July 12, 2022

Emil,

I think that "the professor test" applies to when an interpretation is so mediocre that its merits hinge on the margin of error of the scientific standard which states: it might true because nothing is 100%, or that though X is improbable, X is still possible because anything is possible.

I want to be clear that this was not the case here. I was not exploiting the infinitesimal margin of error of the scientific certitude of a well-established definition, nor was I trying to come up with some "fringe" extreme interpretation just to find fault with answer-choice A.

I genuinely misconstrued the phrase "power plant." And your reply was very insightful.

I did very brief research and I think that I got to the bottom of the issue about power plants.

Let's forget whether it is an "electrical" plant for the moment: generally speaking, a power plant is like an agricultural farm or a drilling oil refinery; we do not go to the oil refinery to get fuel for our cars, and we do not go to a farm to buy our fruits and vegetables (although there was another earlier LSAT diagnostic in which the author of a reading comprehension passage advocated for buying directly from the farm provided the farmers take precautionary measures like purchasing accidentally insurance, pave the road...but I've digressed).

A gas station, on the other hand, is like the intermediary (middleman/middlewoman) between the refinery and the consumer; and in the case of the farm, the intermediary agent would be the grocery store. We go to the grocery store to buy our fruits and vegetables, we do not go the farm; and people, generally speaking, go to the gas stations to buy gas for their cars, they do not go to the petroleum refineries.

So now back to the context of "electricity," I conflated its plant/farm/refinery for its intermediary/gas station/grocery store.

In retrospect, my false interpretation was problematic. When I was taking the diagnostic, under the gun of the clock, I misconstrued the operational definition of the term "power plant." And worse, when I went back to do the "blind review," I picked up passed my false definition and so I did not suspect that the heart of my issue was definitional!

I felt entangled in my own reasoning (identify the evidence, identify the support, find the gap/flaw the usual LSAT skills). Ultimately, I felt in need of expert help (in need of an extrication team :-)), so I posted my thoughts.

The solution, is as you advised, get out of my own head! I went back to the very basics, simply what does that word/phrase mean, in this case "power plant"!

Anyway, this was extraordinarily helpful, far beyond this question helpful, because it highlights a strategy of broader applicability, and although it's basic, it is quintessential to reset, disentangle, and extricate myself from these circular mazes!

I do not have issues with the LSAT writers' choices of correct answer-choices. When I get a question wrong, I know that they are correct, and that I am wrong. I am just trying to understand their reasoning, what's wrong with mine, so I can develop a prophalactic strategy for future questions. In this case, the strategy is zoom in on a key word/phrase/term and make sure I am defining it correctly, not conflating it with another related term!

Thank you
Mazen