Reading Comprehension

PT150 · S4 · P3 · Q17 Dowsing

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

This passage is based on an article written in 1995.

Topic

The effectiveness and legitimacy of dowsing (using handheld tools to locate underground water) as compared to scientific methods.

Framework

Present Debate

Main Point

There is ongoing debate about whether dowsing is a valid technique for locating groundwater; while skeptics offer several criticisms and point to evidence against its effectiveness, recent studies have shown that experienced dowsers sometimes outperform scientific experts in locating water in challenging conditions. (The most valuable summary sentence appears at the end of the last paragraph: )

P1: What is Dowsing?

Dowsing is explained as a method where people use handheld items, like a forked stick, to "find" underground water. The dowser believes the tool moves in response to water sources, and the number of movements supposedly indicates both well depth and flow rate.

P2: Skeptics' Criticisms

Skeptics dismiss dowsing as too crude to be effective. They argue that dowsers are just unconsciously using clues from the surface, and the tool's movements merely reflect subconscious judgments. To further discredit dowsing, skeptics note that any successes are inconsistent and tend to occur in areas where finding groundwater by chance is likely.

P3: Proponents' Defense

Supporters of dowsing argue that there are many techniques and not all have been studied equally. They say studies are flawed because they mostly use self-declared dowsers, not verifiably successful ones. Proponents suggest that skilled dowsers might actually sense changes in the Earth's electromagnetic field, and they even claim these dowsers outperform scientists using traditional scientific methods.

17.

The reasoning in which one of the following is most analogous to an argument explicitly attributed to dowsing's skeptics in the passage?

Some weather analysts claim that
No Match: computer is better
It's hard to even call this answer choice reasoning. There isn't a conclusion/premise here, just two contrasting thoughts. The idea of computers doing better than what some people think any person can do doesn't match up with any of the skeptics' arguments against dowsing.
4% picked this
Some people claim to have
No Match: no evidence
It looks like all the answers are set up in this non-reasoning format. We're apparently supposed to assume in each case that the 2nd claim, the "but" claim, is supporting an implied conclusion that "We are skeptical of the 1st claim". This "argument" is saying, "We should be skeptical that ghosts exist, because very few people who say they do exist can show even the smallest piece of credible evidence". Did the skeptics say, "We should be skeptical that dowsing is effective, because very few dowsers can show even the smallest piece of credible evidence"? No. It was "crude tools / inconsistent success rate / done in areas that unfairly favor success". We need one of those.
3% picked this
Some musicians perform so well
No Match: years of practice
This "argument" is saying, "We should be skeptical that certain awesome musicians are that way because of a pure, innate talent, because in reality they've just practiced a lot." Did the skeptics say, "We should be skeptical that dowsing is effective, because in reality dowsers have just practiced a lot"? No. It was "crude tools / inconsistent success rate / done in areas that unfairly favor success". We need one of those.
3% picked this
Correct
Some people claim to be
Why this is right
This "argument" is saying, "We should be skeptical when people claim they have the ability to sense good fishing spots, because this lake is so loaded with fish that any spot you pick is going to have fish." Did the skeptics say, "We should be skeptical that dowsing is effective, because the area where people dowse is so loaded with groundwater that any spot you pick is going to have groundwater"? Yes! That's the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph. "Areas where groundwater is expected to be ubiquitous" = lakes are so loaded with fish "it's statistically unlikely that a dowsed well will be completely dry" = it would be difficult not to pick a good spot
Skill tested: Analogy · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.
89% picked this
Some people have memories of
No Evidence at All
This drifts even farther from any skeptical "argument". No one here is claiming anything that a skeptic could rebut. The author is just telling us that when someone has a memory of participating in a historical event, that doesn't prove they have been reincarnated. She doesn't offer any reason for that skepticism, so there's nothing here to even try to match up with the rationale of dowsing skeptics..
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.

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