LSAT 159 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q20

LR Question 20 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Essayist: Since ancient times humans have relied on myths …

QUESTION TYPE: Identify the Conclusion

CONCLUSION: Science falls short of complete truth.

REASONING: It is responsible for significant social harm.

ANALYSIS: This is a bad argument, but we’re not asked to evaluate the argument here.

To find the main conclusion, start by separating what’s being supported from what’s doing the supporting.

The first few sentences set up background ideas: that myths and science both serve to explain our place in the world and that both are judged by how useful they are in helping us cope. You can disregard these.

The final sentence is where the actual argument is. The author argues that while science has some successes, it falls short of complete truth as shown by its responsibility for social breakdown. The statement that science falls short of complete truth is what the author is trying to get us to accept, i.e. the conclusion.

___________

1. This is something the author says to support the conclusion (evidence that science falls short of truth), not the conclusion itself.
2. Tempting, but too strong. The author compares science and myth in function, not in degree of truth.
3. CORRECT. That’s exactly what the author concludes. Science falls short of complete truth.
4. The author never said science is a myth, only that it resembles myth in its function.
5. This is just background context from the first sentence that we can ignore.