Reading Comprehension

PT113 · S1 · P2 · Q12 Marie Curie

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Spurred by the discovery that a substance containing uranium emitted radiation, Marie Curie began studying radioactivity in 1897.

Topic

Marie Curie's early research on radioactivity and its historical context

Framework

Old / New

Main Point

Marie Curie made foundational discoveries in radioactivity based on the evidence and scientific understanding available to her at the time, and any modern criticisms for not reaching later conclusions are misplaced because her work paved the way for those later breakthroughs. (Most Valuable Sentence: — last paragraph)

P1: Curie’s Pioneering Experiments

Marie Curie started her work on radioactivity after discovering that uranium emitted radiation. She found pitchblende was even more radioactive than uranium and, hypothesizing that a new element was responsible, discovered polonium and radium. She also noted that the emission rate for a given element seemed constant and couldn’t explain the underlying mechanism for radiation.

P2: Modern Understanding and Limits of Curie’s Evidence

Today we know that radiation is due to the decay of isotopes and that emission rates slowly decrease over time. Some have criticized Curie for not reaching these modern conclusions, but given what was available to her scientifically (especially since most radioactive isotopes of lighter elements don’t exist naturally), such criticisms are unfair.

P3: Scientific Context of Curie’s Era

During Curie’s time, the structure and nature of atoms were still being debated: physicists saw matter as eventually being indivisible, while chemists conveniently used the concept of atoms without worrying about whether atoms truly existed.

12.

The primary function of the first paragraph of the passage is to

  1. narrate the progress of turn-of-the-century

    Wrong Emphasis: not about Curie

    This paragraph/passage is all about Curie. She literally appears in every sentence in the first paragraph, so we're not accepting any answer that isn't about Curie.

    8% picked this

  2. present a context for the

    Wrong Emphasis: not about Curie

    This paragraph/passage is all about Curie. She literally appears in every sentence in the first paragraph, so we're not accepting any answer that isn't about Curie.

    1% picked this

  3. Correct

    provide the factual background for

    Why this is right

    This answer nicely captures that we dive straight into details, aka "the factual background". There's isn't any evaluation of Curie's work in this paragraph. That part of the answer is just explaining how this first paragraph will relate to the rest of the passage. The evaluation comes at the very end. This first paragraph is nothing but factual details. The second paragraph starts to introduce opinions from critics. So it matches well enough to say that the 1st paragraph functions as the factual backdrop for what Curie did / didn't do in the field of radiation.

    Skill tested: Paragraph Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    88% picked this

  4. outline the structure of the

    Out of Scope: structure of argument

    As we assessed earlier, this first paragraph just goes immediately into details. There are no framing ideas or big picture announcements. We just land at the beginning of the story of Curie's radioactive discoveries. The author's central argument is, "Curie made some badass discoveries and shouldn't be faulted for what she wasn't able to figure out". The details in the first paragraph relate to that central argument, but since all the sentences in the first paragraph are neutral, descriptive, factual ideas, we can't say that the author is every outlining his own argument there.

    3% picked this

  5. identify the error in Curie’s

    Opposite Point of View

    The author is ultimately saying, "Curie's discoveries were incredibly important, and her inability to explain radiation was totally understandable." He doesn't ever argue that there was any error in her work that undermines its usefulness.

    1% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free