Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT124 S2 Q9 Explanation

Phoebe: There have been many

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsMethod

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Phoebe: There have been many reported sightings of strange glowing lights, but a number of these sightings have a straightforward, natural explanation. They occurred clustered in time and location around the epicenters of three earthquakes, and so were almost lightning caused by stresses in the ground.

Quincy: I am skeptical that the association between the lights and the earthquakes is anything more than a coincidence. The theory that ground stresses related to of lightning is extremely speculative.

What this question is testing

Method

Your task

Describe how the argument proceeds — the technique it uses to reach its conclusion.

Common trap

Answers that describe a method the argument doesn't actually use.

Winning move

Track the role each statement plays, then match that to the choice describing the same moves.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
9.

In responding to Phoebe,

Answer choices

  1. Opposite7% picked this

    takes a correlation to be a

    Quincy is arguing, "I think this correlation is probably not a causal relation. It's just coincidence."

  2. Out of Scope: challenges sightings11% picked this

    challenges the accuracy of the data about sightings that Phoebe takes

    Quincy isn't every challenging the idea that people sighted weird glowing lights. Quincy is only challenging Phoebe's explanation for what was causing those lights.

  3. Correct77% picked this

    criticizes Phoebe’s explanation as

    Why this is right

    This is not lovable, but it's our best match for "Quincy said that Phoebe's evidence is sketchy." An "extremely speculative" theory is one that doesn't have any / much credible evidence yet. Thus it is unsubstantiated.

    Skill tested: Method · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  4. Out of Scope: alternate explanation4% picked this

    offers an explanation of the glowing lights different

    We might have picked this thinking, Quincy is saying the real explanation is that it's just a coincidence. But "it's a coincidence" isn't an explanation for why there were glowing lights. It's an explanation for why glowing lights happened near the time / location of three earthquakes.

  5. Out of Scope: irrelevant1% picked this

    accuses Phoebe of introducing irrelevant

    Quincy isn't suggesting that Phoebe's evidence is irrelevant, because it refers to "ground stresses" which is relevant to earthquakes and "lightning" which is relevant to sighting of strange slowing lights. He's just saying we don't have any real scientific grasp of whether earthquakes ever cause any kind of lightning.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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