LSAT 159 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q2

LR Question 2 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Some have argued that using food crops to produce …

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: It is not unusual to divert crops from the food supply.

REASONING: We already divert crops away from human consumption to feed farm animals.

ANALYSIS: The argument responds to the complaint that it’s an unprecedented attack on food supply by saying: No it isn’t, we’ve been doing something similar for a long time.

That’s an analogy to an accepted, traditional practice. Interestingly, this isn’t a great argument: humans eat livestock. So, in the example given we’re diverting food to make food, raising a distinction from the fuel example.

However, as this is a method of reasoning question we don’t actually have to look for possible flaws, we just have to describe what the argument does.

___________

1. There’s no discussion of the positive or negative consequences of the practice.
2. If you consider the consequence to be the diversion of food, the author accepts that consequence. They’re just saying it’s a normal consequence we already accept in other cases.
3. CORRECT. The argument rebuts the claim that the practice is radical by showing it parallels an existing practice.
4. The author recognizes that the practice seems immoral, but that’s not the part they try to rebut.
5. Opposite. It’s emphasizing similarities of the two practices, not the difference.