Logical Reasoning

PT140 · S3 · Q8 John of Worcester, an English monk

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning 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

John of Worcester, an English monk, recorded the sighting, on December 8, 1128, of two unusually large sunspots.

Conclusion

The Korean sighting helps to confirm John of Worcester's sighting.

Evidence

John recorded two unusually large sunspots on Dec 8th, 1128.

Five days later there was an aurora borealis observed in southern Korea, and sunspot activity is typically followed about five days later by an aurora borealis.

Evaluate

The author already provides some plausibility for the connection between sunspots and aurora borealis, but it's like this ...

If .... there is sunspot Then ... aurora borealis activity, five days later.

This argument is kind of going backwards. It establishes that an aurora borealis was sighted five days later and then tries to reason backwards to, "I guess there was sunspot activity".

We would potentially object to this argument by saying something like, .

Goal

If we make it seem like aurora borealis is a rare thing, that strengthens the likelihood that the one observed in 1128 was linked to sunspots. We could also strengthen by establishing the plausibility of the causal story --- would a sunspot seen from England actually materialize as aurora borealis in Korea?

Those two places are so geographically removed from each other that maybe we would doubt the events are connected because of that.

Look for something to rule out an alternate explanation for the Korean aurora borealis, or an answer that increases the plausibility that the Korean aurora borealis was the five-day follow-up from the sunspots that John observed.

8.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

  1. An aurora borealis can sometimes

    Weakens, if anything

    An answer as weakly worded as "sometimes" will almost always be wrong on Strengthen, Weaken, and Paradox. But this one even goes in the wrong direction, since it's de-coupling sunspots and aurora borealis, when the argument is trying to associate them with each other.

    3% picked this

  2. Chinese sources recorded the sighting

    No Impact

    Sunspot sightings from a millennium before John's sighting are out of scope, unless they are providing another instance in which a sunspot sighting in Europe was followed by an aurora borealis in Southeast Asia.

    4% picked this

  3. Correct

    Only heavy sunspot activity could

    Why this is right

    This rules out alternate possibilities for the aurora borealis in Korea. If Korea had aurora borealis somewhat commonly from other causes, then there would be no reason to think that any given aurora borealis sighting in Korea was strong evidence of sunspots (which presumably are not that rare). So this answer strengthens the argument by ruling out all alternative causes for aurora borealis. The strong language of "only" is great news, when we're looking for a powerful answer on Strengthen / Weaken / Paradox. This answer is so strong, it's conditional: aurora borealis ⇢ must have been caused by in Korea heavy sunspot activity We know that there was an aurora borealis in Korea, so this answer tells us that it was definitely caused by heavy sunspot activity. So that greatly increases the plausibility that this sighting is connected to John's sighting of sunspots.

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

    82% picked this

  4. Because it is impossible to

    No Impact

    This answer just establishes that John's sighting would have taken place in fog or thin clouds. Does that do anything to connect it to the aurora borealis in Korea? Nope.

    3% picked this

  5. John of Worcester's account included

    No Impact

    This provides more detail about how John recorded his sighting, but this answer does nothing to connect John's sunspot sighting to the aurora borealis in Korea.

    9% 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