RC Passage 1 Explanation, by LSATHacks
This is an explanation for passage 1 of LSAT preptest 38, the October 2002 LSAT. This passage is about forests in the Americas. It argues that there is evidence that natives burned forests before the arrival of Colombus.
This section has paragraph summaries and an analysis of the passage, links to the explanations for the questions are below.
Paragraph Summaries
- Natives had changed many forests in the Western Hemisphere before Columbus arrived. They usually did this using fire. Nonetheless, some researchers think climate change could have changed forests, or that natives only rarely burned forests.
- But there’s much evidence of burning.
- Native fires helped some species. For example, berries and pines. Unusual plant patterns provide evidence that natives burnt forests.
Analysis
There are many details here. You don’t need to know them; you never need to. Instead, you need to know three things:
1. What’s the point of the passage? (arguing against the researchers)
2. You need to understand it, in broad terms. Reread anything you don’t understand.
3. You need to know where to find details. That’s the point of the paragraph summaries. I usually do mine in my head, and they’re shorter. But they let me find information quickly when I need to. So if you have to know about evidence of burning, you look in paragraph 2. If the question is about plant species, the answer is probably in paragraph 3.
Hi, I'm Graeme Blake
Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.
I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle
If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.
---------
Updates:
For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.
Hi Graeme, I had two questions:
i) I also thought the main point was to argue against certain researchers; but what is the role of the 3rd paragraph with the passage?
ii) If the 3rd is used to support the main point, why its content can’t be taken as a part of the evidence, as opposed to the 2nd paragraph?
1. Correct, the author disagrees with the scholars in the first paragraph, and supports the view that Natives had burned forests before Europeans arrived. The structure of the passage is as follows: paragraph one establishes the author’s intent, which is to argue against the scholars. Paragraph 2 provides evidence of the author’s argument. Paragraph 3 goes into specific details about how burning created the landscape that Europeans encountered when they first arrived. If the landscape was already a certain way due to burning before the Europeans arrived, that would support the idea that Natives also burned.
2. There is a slight distinction between what Paragraphs 2 and 3 provide evidence for. Paragraph 2 gives evidence about the act of burning itself (consequences, signs, etc.). Paragraph 3 gives evidence of WHO did the burning. That’s why if you’re looking for evidence of the act of burning, you’d refer to paragraph 2.