Q16

 
bermudask8er7
Thanks Received: 4
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 24
Joined: August 09th, 2010
 
 
 

Q16

by bermudask8er7 Sat Aug 28, 2010 6:49 pm

In the answer (C), what do "metals that can be made highly reflective but lose their reflective properties over time" refer to , and what does "a metal that does not similarly lose its relfective properties" refer to? I can't find the specific part of the passage to figure out if it's between brass/bronze and gold, or between gold and chrome-nickel steel.

Thanks
User avatar
 
ManhattanPrepLSAT1
Thanks Received: 1909
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 2863
Joined: October 07th, 2009
 
This post thanked 1 time.
 
 

Re: PT59 S4 Q16 - in saying that "no metals

by ManhattanPrepLSAT1 Tue Aug 31, 2010 4:53 am

Glad to help.

The metals that can be made highly reflective but that lose their reflective properties in answer choice (C) are most strongly referring to the statues done in brass and bronze that Noguchi was polishing for Brancusi.

The metal that does not lose it's reflective properties would be the very expensive non-oxidizing gold.

(A) is unsupported. Moderately reflective is not the issue but metals that retain their reflective properties are.
(B) is unsupported. The issue is not naturally or unnaturally reflective, but rather retains or fails to retain the reflective properties.
(D) is irrelevant. The issue is not long lasting versus impermanent metals but rather long lasting versus impermanent reflective properties.
(E) is irrelevant. The distinction is not between accepted versus experimental as this answer choice suggests.

I hope this helps clear this one up!
 
rishisb
Thanks Received: 0
Jackie Chiles
Jackie Chiles
 
Posts: 29
Joined: February 28th, 2010
 
 
 

Re: PT59 S4 Q16 - in saying that "no metals

by rishisb Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:45 pm

Hi, Matt:

Regarding answer choice C: Could you tell me please where the passage makes a contrast between metal that (1) reflects permanently and (2) metal that reflects but then loses its ability to do so.

YES: It's true that Noguchi's art had a permanent reflective surface (line 36). But. . . WHERE does the passage say/hint that the reflective ability of metals not used by Noguchi was impermanent ?
Last edited by rishisb on Sun Oct 10, 2010 6:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
mag2108
Thanks Received: 1
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 2
Joined: September 09th, 2010
 
This post thanked 1 time.
 
 

Re: PT59 S4 Q16 - in saying that "no metals

by mag2108 Tue Oct 05, 2010 11:12 pm

rishisb wrote:Hi, Matt:

Regarding answer choice C: Could you tell me please where the passage makes a contrast between metal that (1) reflects permanently and (2) metal that reflects but then loses its ability to do so.

YES: It's true that Noguchi's art had a permanent reflective surface (line 36). But. . . WHERE does the passage say/hint that the reflective ability of metals not used by Noguchi was impermanent ?

I'm increasingly frustrated at this horseshit of a test . . .


It seems like you got this but may be thinking about it too hard --I find that the LSAT requires a fine balance of analysis--you get in just as much trouble by over analyzing something.

As you mention, the author makes a point that Noguchi created a permanently reflective sculpture (using Ford's chrome-nickle steel). And it's easy to miss it but line 37 states that "here, finally, was a permanently reflective surface." So here it's clear that before this point, there was no permanently reflective material used for sculpture. Then, Line 29 seems to hint at this in saying that "Noguchi wanted to create a sculpture that was purely reflective," (here create seems to hint that it did not exist before). Also, the line in question (25-27) states that "no metals... could be relied upon" meaning that the property in question (reflectivity) is not reliable hence is lost (i.e. not permanent).

This is a damn tricky question, in my opinion, but I hope this helps.

Best of luck!
 
rishisb
Thanks Received: 0
Jackie Chiles
Jackie Chiles
 
Posts: 29
Joined: February 28th, 2010
 
 
 

Re: PT59 S4 Q16 - in saying that "no metals

by rishisb Sun Oct 10, 2010 6:25 pm

Hi, Mag (or Matt or both):

Thank you for reply. I had a quick follow-up:

First, here's a quote of Line 35 "Here, finally, was a permanently reflective surface, economically aviable in massive quantities."

Initially, when I read the passage I read the line to mean that: Finally, a metal that is both permanently reflective and cheap has been found. Reading it this way, nothing in line 35 really suggests that Noguchi's metal's were pemanent in a way that other metals were not; after all, maybe other metals are permantely reflective but only Noguchi's metal cheap. Hence, I not inclinced to pick answer choice C.

My question: What exactly does line 35 mean, if not what I thought it meant? And, how did you know how to read it that way?
User avatar
 
ManhattanPrepLSAT1
Thanks Received: 1909
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 2863
Joined: October 07th, 2009
 
 
 

Re: PT59 S4 Q16 - in saying that "no metals

by ManhattanPrepLSAT1 Tue Oct 12, 2010 4:18 pm

Hey Rishi,

I think you're turned around big time on this one!

The question asks us to identify the meaning of lines 25-27. So, it would be the rare question that would find the answer to that meaning in line 35. I see that in 1929 we have the discovery of this cheap, permanently reflective surface.

In lines 25-27, we're back in 1927 and we're trying to find an answer choice that describes the relationship between nonoxidizing gold and the other metals available at that time.

The line reference distinguishes nonoxidizing gold as the only permanently reflective surface (that's why in 1929 it was such a big deal to get this permanently reflective surface that wasn't as expensive as nonoxidizing gold). The distinction that nonoxidizing gold was the only permanently reflective surface in 1927 is best expressed in answer choice (C).

Does that make sense?
 
sheffieldjordan
Thanks Received: 0
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 14
Joined: March 01st, 2011
 
 
 

Q16

by sheffieldjordan Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:51 pm

What exactly is #16 asking? And how is B an unsuitable answer? And why is C the correct answer?

Thanks.
 
giladedelman
Thanks Received: 757
LSAT Geek
 
Posts: 620
Joined: April 04th, 2010
 
This post thanked 1 time.
 
 

Re: Q16

by giladedelman Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:53 pm

Well, it's asking us what the author is distinguishing between. The question doesn't totally make sense until we look at the answer choices, but my take on the phrase in question is that the author is distinguishing between metals that can't be relied on to give off reflections, on the one hand, and an expensive metal that can be, on the other hand.

(C) is right because it hits this distinction. Most metals, like bronze, lose their reflective properties, but gold, which doesn't oxidize, will stay shiny.

(A) is incorrect because there's no moderate vs. highly comparison here.

(B) is incorrect because while gold is highly reflective and not suited for sculpture, the other metals are not highly reflective; they are suitable for sculpture.

(D) is incorrect because there are no nonmetallic materials discussed.

(E) is out because this has nothing to do with accepted vs. experimental.

Does that help?
 
americano1990
Thanks Received: 22
Jackie Chiles
Jackie Chiles
 
Posts: 29
Joined: April 24th, 2011
 
 
 

Re: Q16

by americano1990 Sat Nov 19, 2011 1:29 am

Hi all

So in answering this question, did we have to know what 'oxidize' means? And also, did we have to know that 'relied upon' indicates the durability of gold?

I mean, was there any context clue that we could have relied on, or would the terms "rely upon" and "oxidize" do everything for you?

Feels like if you had to know what oxidize means....gah....seems like a pretty bad question...but oh well...this passage is an infamous one so...guess its okay haha

Thanks~
User avatar
 
noah
Thanks Received: 1096
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 1546
Joined: February 11th, 2009
 
 
 

Re: Q16

by noah Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:34 pm

(And I'll step in for Gilad, as he's on vacation).

Interesting question. I think you could cobble it together by working wrong to right and by understanding the third paragraph. There we learn about a "permanently reflective surface." Apparently, this is what Noguchi wanted.

Also, the phrase "could be relied upon" is oddly and suggestively open in that it leaves room for the phenomenon to occur, but suggests that it doesn't always.
 
phil.ogea
Thanks Received: 0
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 7
Joined: June 18th, 2014
 
 
 

Re: Q16

by phil.ogea Fri Sep 19, 2014 7:15 pm

I think i have a pretty fundamental question.

In my passage map I have paragraph 2, which contains the lines 25-27 in question, marked as "identifying a void in sculpting" while paragraph 3 is "advancement in materials"

Essentially the lines 25-27, to me, are identifying gold as the less than ideal standard that the new advancement (chrome nickel steel) that Noguchi experimented with in paragraph 3 and 4 improved upon. This is enforced by lines 25-27 being placed in the concluding sentence, often used for transition. So I chose E.

Where in this line of thinking did I go awry?



Secondly, I am entirely confused for the support of C because there are no references in the paper to metals that lose reflectivity over time unless you make the huge unsupported assumption, with the requirement of outside knowledge, that brass or bronze are positive light surfaces but require polishing.

Thanks in advance
 
christine.defenbaugh
Thanks Received: 487
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 543
Joined: May 17th, 2013
 
This post thanked 1 time.
 
 

Re: Q16

by christine.defenbaugh Wed Sep 24, 2014 10:50 am

Great questions, phil.ogea!

First, the passage map you have for paragraphs 2 and 3 is great! I think the problem was in how you identified which metals were the original standard for sculpture in paragraph 2. But let's get to that in a moment.

Regardless of which metal you identified as "the standard", the quote in this question is not asking us to make a distinction between chrome-nickel steel (p.3) and "the standard" (p.2). Let's go back to the quote:

    "No metals, other than the expensive nonoxidizing gold, could be relied upon to give positive-light reflections"

Keeping our eye tight to this quote, the distinction the author is making is between gold on the one hand, and other metals that cannot be relied on to give positive-light reflections. Chrome-nickel steel simply doesn't come into the picture yet. So, what other metals are we talking about? Brass and bronze were mentioned earlier in the paragraph as sculpture metals, so those must be some of those 'other metals'. And the distinction between the metals is entirely focused on how reliably they give positive light reflections.

Now, here's where you have to use just a dash of common sense. "Positive-light reflections" just means that they're shiny! Well, dude, most metals are shiny at least sometimes. And, as Noah points out, the phrase "relied upon" suggests that these other metals CAN be shiny, just not reliably. So, this distinction is between:
    1) Gold - can be relied on to be shiny
    2) other metals - shiny sometimes, but not always

Just using this information alone, we should be able to eliminate (E), because it compares two super shiny metals!! We need to compare "shiny always" with "only shiny sometimes".

Only (C) captures this shiny-always vs shiny-sometimes distinction. We might not have realized that the shiny-sometimes metals 'could be made shiny', but this answer absolutely fits the simple distinction we can extract from the quote.


Now, while it's not critical for answering this question, I do want to comment on your identification of gold as "the standard" that chrome-nickel steel improved upon. Paragraph 2 mentions brass, bronze, AND gold. All three of these metals have problems (and so fit with your label of 'a void in scultping'). But which were 'the standard'? Looking to line 23, we see that "sculptors through the ages had relied exclusively on negative light." Since we know that gold is the one metal at this point that does "positive light" reliably, if the sculptors are focused on negative light, they are using the other metals other than gold as their standard sculpting metals (i.e., brass and bronze). Notice that brass and bronze sculpture are mentioned in line 21, while no gold sculptures are similarly mentioned!

The more important point, though, is that I think you turned this question into a comparison between "the standard" and "the new thing" (chrome-nickel steel), when it's actually a comparison between gold and other metals (like brass, bronze, etc).

Does that help clear a few things up?
 
jewels0602
Thanks Received: 1
Elle Woods
Elle Woods
 
Posts: 58
Joined: September 20th, 2014
 
 
 

Re: Q16

by jewels0602 Thu May 21, 2015 6:05 pm

I was really stuck on this question too but I guess more support for C can be from lines 21-22... the metal discussed up until line 27 are gold, brass and bronze. The latter two apparently needed polishing, so if that's the case maybe they weren't permanently shiny/reflective

I don't know I was not a big fan of this at all... I prephrased before tacking the question to think that gold was something that could give off positive-light vs. negative light but that was bust :(
 
hayleychen12
Thanks Received: 0
Jackie Chiles
Jackie Chiles
 
Posts: 35
Joined: March 08th, 2017
 
 
 

Re: Q16

by hayleychen12 Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:42 am

Hi! I completely understand how gold matches the part "a metal that does not similarly lose its reflective properties."

However, I cannot see how brass and bronze matches the part" metals that can be made highly reflective but lose their reflective properties over time.", since well according to my common sense a sculpture made of brass or bronze is far from "highly reflective" even after being polished. :(

Any help will be appreciated!
User avatar
 
ohthatpatrick
Thanks Received: 2780
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 4076
Joined: April 01st, 2011
 
This post thanked 1 time.
 
 

Re: Q16

by ohthatpatrick Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:38 pm

Just use the text ... according to lines 25-27, "no other metals, other than gold, " can be relied upon to give off positive-light reflections.

This isn't saying that other metals NEVER give off reflections. It's saying ONLY gold ALWAYS gives off positive-light reflections.
 
JamesM914
Thanks Received: 0
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 11
Joined: October 05th, 2017
 
 
 

Re: Q16

by JamesM914 Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:03 am

I thought the LSAT doesn't require having outside knowledge, yet it seems like this question requires us to know the meaning of "non oxidation." I got this question right because I know what oxidation means, but I can see why some people got this question wrong. The biggest problem I have with the LSAT continues to be abstract/obscure/arbitrary language, but this outside knowledge thing rears its ugly head once in a while.
 
EvelynM330
Thanks Received: 0
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 2
Joined: October 10th, 2018
 
 
 

Re: Q16

by EvelynM330 Tue Nov 06, 2018 12:48 pm

I eliminated C exactly because I knew what oxidization means, and I've been trapped by LSAT too many times from assuming certain scientific knowledge that's not explicitly given in the text. Also want to point out that not only does answer C assumes a knowledge of the word 'oxidization', it also assumes that 'nonoxidizing' means 'naturally permanently non-oxidizing', which is not necessarily true.