LSAT 155 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q17

LR Question 17 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Legislator: University humanities departments bring in less…

QUESTION TYPE: Role in Argument

CONCLUSION: It is a mistake for universities to cut humanities departments when facing budget shortfalls.

REASONING: Humanities departments bring in less tuition and grant money, but cost less money for teaching and research. This means that humanities departments bring in more than they spend, while science departments are the opposite.

This means that humanities departments actually subsidize science departments, contrary to the popular characterization that humanities departments are being subsidized.

ANALYSIS: This is a layered argument, but it’s ultimately not too complex. The claim that teaching and research cost less in humanities than they do in the sciences is part of the basis for the premise that humanities departments bring in more than they spend, unlike science departments.

___________

1. The author isn’t arguing that the stereotype is accurate. The author is refuting the stereotype.
2. The claim that teaching and research cost less in humanities than sciences is not an alleged stereotype.
3. CORRECT. This claim supports the idea that humanities departments bring in more than they spend, which is the explanation for the premise that humanities departments subsidize science departments.
4. This claim is not an intermediate conclusion. It’s used as support for premises that lead to the conclusion.
5. The claims are not used as independent support, but instead form a chain of reasoning.

Recap: The question begins with “Legislator: University humanities departments bring in less”. It is a Role in Argument question. Learn how to master LSAT Role questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.