Q19

[geverett]

A vs. B? Go!

[gilad.bendheim]

I think (B) has it a bit backwards, only because my sense is that the passage is organized in more of a Traditional hypothesis --> example --> counter example --> counter/alternative hypothesis --> Prediction based on assumption of counterhypothesis' validity. Its unclear, to me at least, what the phenomenon in choice (B) would be. Would it be the even of the turtle's sticking their heads out? That seems to play more of an example role. Maybe it is the general phenomenon of peculiar animal behavior in conflict? But then which are the examples that relate to it - the turtles or the spiders? I dont think it can be both, because they are brought as examples to two different theories, and since the answer doesn't say that it describes two phenomena, its doesn't fit so well.
(A) on the other hand hits on the diagram I have up top, namely that the traditional view is contested by an alternative view.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

I'd agree with gilad.bendheim!

Answer choices (A) and (B) offer very different interpretations of what was happening in the passage. One thing that I like to do is to refer back to the answer choice I selected on the "Main Point" question to make sure that there is a fundamental agreement between the "Main Point" and the "Primary Purpose" answer choices. The correct answer to Q13 is answer choice (C), "that evolutionary game theory may be useful in explaining the behavior of certain spiders." So, the correct answer to the Q19 should offer something about providing an explanation to something. While answer choice (A) doesn't mention the word "explain," it does offer a comparison between the traditional approach and an alternative approach - this actually a really common pattern in RC where the passage compares the old way of doing things with the new way.

What's the traditional approach? it's a way of explaining animal behavior, so the answer does match up with the correct answer to the "Main Point" question.

Lets look at the incorrect answers:

(B) is wrong for the reason gilad.bendheim mentioned above. There are examples in this passage, but what we suggest is the phenomenon.
(C) has it close but not quite. The passage is concerned with evaluating theories on explaining animal behavior, but not the evidence that underlies such theories.
(D) doesn't go far enough. The passage is concerned with more than refuting a theory, but also providing an alternative theory to the traditional approach.
(E) puts the author on the wrong side of the scale. The author is supporting the new theory!

Hope that helps!

[geverett]

I can definitely dig A. On B I am having a hard time refuting it, however, because to me the phenomenon would be spiders engaging in behavior other than ritualized, display behavior and the examples to support it would be these line references:

15 - 16

20 - 23

30 - 33

46 - 51

I'm not sure if these can constitute as examples however.

Since examples is plural would we need more instances than just the example cited of the A. aperta spider?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Sure, you could say that answer choice (B) occurs in the passage, but you have to remember the author's intent. Is the author simply satisfied with presenting information on the phenomenon? it seems to be more than that. The author goes into great length about the spiders but this is an illustration of animal behavior that doesn't fit into the traditional model - which is why the author thinks that Reichert's new model makes a lot of sense.

[jlz1202]

I think A is the credited response because it is just less flawed compared to the other four--it is not a perfect correct answer?

'approach" in A really confuses me--in a large number of primary purpose questions of RC, "approach" always appear to be "research method" which approximates dictionary definition. But "approach" here seems to refer to "theory". I don't see any discussion about "research method/approach" in the passage--it's all about theories.

Thus "approach" here seems very reluctant?

Any thoughts?

Thanks a lot!

[arghavans178]

can someone explain how A is the correct answer and not B?
i think what confused me about A was the fact that it used the term "alternative" and when i saw that it seemed a little strong to me especially for a PP question.

[ohthatpatrick]

I wouldn't consider the word "alternative" to be strong in any way. It actually seems like a very mild word.

Let's say you have two theories:
one is either an alternative to the other
or
the two are completely identical

The 2nd option is the extreme option. The 1st one is very mild.


The structure of this passage, like most Physical Science passages on LSAT, is "Old vs. New".

- You typically get a description of the Old theory / riddle / paradox / understanding in the first paragraph.
- Then there's some "But / yet / however / recently" pivot to the New theory / answer / resolution / understanding.
- Then there's a lot of technical detail about the New
- Then (usually), the author assesses the implications of all this at the end

In this passage, the author never swooped in to assess implications. Instead, the final paragraph was more about Riechert announcing some implications / predictions of the theory.

The first two paragraphs give us these big ideas:

1st P
TRADITIONAL THEORIES say XYZ
- These tortoises are an example of XYZ

2nd P
However, this AA spider doesn't seem to fit the XYZ description.
RIECHERT argues that a RECENTLY DEVELOPED model, provides a closer fit for the spider's behavior.

The rest of Paragraph 2 tells us more about this new model.
Paragraph 3 gives us some specific predictions the model would make about this spider.

It's definitely safe to say that a RECENTLY DEVELOPED model is not the same as a TRADITIONAL theory, so we can certainly call it an "alternative" model/theory/approach.

For (B), what is the phenomenon and what are the specific examples?

There seem to be only two specific examples in the passage (G tortoises and AA spiders). But they are not examples of the same phenomenon.

G tortoises are an example of the traditional model (ritualized fighting that doesn't actually harm the combatants). AA spiders are an example of the evolutionary game theory model (fighting that might escalate to a serious level if the stakes are high enough).

So there's no way to match up PLURAL specific examples for ONE phenomenon.

If we were thinking maybe all the predictions in the last paragraph could be called examples, that would be a weird distortion of language. In that paragraph, Riechert is providing specific predictions of a theory. But that's not the same as specific examples of a phenomenon.

Also, we wouldn't call what happens in the 3rd paragraph the Primary Purpose of the passage. That would be too narrow a reading. Purpose is almost always revealed by how we frame the topic in the beginning of the passage. That's why we read the first paragraph more slowly than anything else.

The big sentences early on are "Traditional theories hold X, Y, and Z. However this spider doesn't seem to match that. This scientist proposes a recently developed model that seems to be a better fit."

Hope this helps.