LSAT 129 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q9

LR Question 9 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Even if many more people in the world excluded meat from

QUESTION TYPE: Weaken

CONCLUSION: World hunger would not decrease much even if lots of people stopped eating meat.

REASONING: No evidence is given.

ANALYSIS: Occasionally LSAT questions give arguments without evidence. In such cases you just need to get a very precise sense of what’s being argued. Then ask whether the answers affect it.

We’re looking for evidence that eating less meat will reduce hunger.

None of the wrong answers differentiate meat from other crops. But that’s the only way to weaken the argument.

___________

1. This is just a random fact about hunger. It tells us nothing about meat.
2. This just makes meat and crops equal. We’re looking for a difference between meat and crops.
   (herds = animals, meat, crops = plants)
3. CORRECT. This is good evidence. If we replace meat with crops then we could feed more people. This suggests the reasoning above is wrong and that vegetarianism could feed more people.
4. It’s not clear how meat applies. If people are in remote areas then no food can reach them, no matter what people are eating elsewhere.
5. This adds nothing about meat. To weaken the argument we need to show that meat is more likely to lead to hunger.