When Wrong Answers Attack
When Wrong Answers attack!
Sharks have very few redeeming features. They're not cute; they're not affectionate (unless you consider biting your legs off as a sign of affection, in which case you should probably see a relationship counsellor); they're not good at hockey; they rarely get invited to parties. However, disadvantages aside, sharks have been around for more than 400 million years – they were terrorizing the denizens of the seas long before dinosaurs walked the earth.
In fact, sharks have barely evolved during that entire period. Why? Because what they are and do works! Sharks are the evolutionary embodiment of the old saying, “if it ain't broke, don't fix it”.
Wrong answer traps are the sharks of the LSAT. These traps haven't evolved – the same ones are around today as when caveman lawyers were taking the exam. Just like sharks, the traps haven't had to get bigger or stronger or smarter or meaner, because they still eat their fill of unwary test taker.
Let's see just how shark-like some of these traps are!
Outside the Scope
You're working through a question, in the middle of a self-motivational speech and getting ready to kick some butt, when WHAM, out of nowhere, an answer jumps out of the water and devours your score.
By far the most common trap on the LSAT, outside the scope choices focus on irrelevant information – things you may know about the real world, but which aren't mentioned in the stimulus or passage. Remember: answers whose focus are different than the author's are extremely unlikely to be true.
180
You've broken down and fully understand the argument. You're working through the choices and get to one that talks about all the right stuff – nothing out of scope here! You pick it, not realizing that it does the exact opposite of what the question asks. Shark-like test makers know that sometimes you get so involved in checking out the cool coral you don't notice the predator lurking behind you. It's easy to get turned around and forget what the question was asking in the first place.
Irrelevant Comparison
This time you've brought your outside-the-scope repellent and your 180-proof wet suit. Hey, there's an answer that mentions the 2 key elements of the argument! How does this Selachimorpha still manage to make you its dinner? By comparing those two elements in a way that's outside the scope of the argument. For example, maybe the author is assuming that dolphins are smarter than porpoises – and an answer choice tells you that dolphins are stronger than porpoises instead.
Too Extreme/Not Extreme Enough
You're probably thinking, “OK.. I can understand how a shark could be too extreme, but how could a shark be not extreme enough?” Well, it all depends on the nature of the beast.
For example, some LSAT questions ask you for the bare minimum thing that needs to be true (necessary assumption questions) and others ask for something that's fully deducible from the information provided (inference questions). In both cases, answers that go beyond the language of the material are too extreme. Why are these choices so attractive? Because we like certainty – the test-making sharks know that and use it to our disadvantage.
On the other hand, some LSAT questions ask you make an argument more or less believable (strengthen/weaken questions). In these cases, overly tame sharks (
)just won't get the job done. If we want to make an impact on an argument, we need a powerful answer.
Knowing when to choose Mr. Nasty Shark and when to choose Mr. Mild Shark is often the key to not ending up as a shark hors d'oeuvre.
So, what's the moral of our shark tale? It's better to be the predator than the prey! Learning the common traps is your key to avoiding getting eaten on Test Day.