LSAT 19, Logical Reasoning I, Q17, LSATHacks

LR Question 17 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: People cannot devote themselves to the study of…

QUESTION TYPE: Complete the Argument

CONCLUSION: Agriculture must have developed under conditions of plenty, not scarcity.

REASONING: The argument points out that people need leisure to study nature and they need surplus resources to have leisure. Agriculture required studying natural processes.

Agriculture ➞ studying natural processes ➞ leisure ➞ resources.

ANALYSIS: The main conclusion has to involve all parts of the argument. The argument mentioned the anthropologists in order to disagree with them: agriculture required plenty, not scarcity.

___________

1. This isn’t even true according to the argument. Study requires leisure, but leisure doesn’t always lead to study, as anyone who’s been a teenager knows.
2. This isn’t even true. The argument didn’t mention theory. You can figure out how to do something without making a correct theory to explain why it works.
3. CORRECT. Agriculture and the study of nature require leisure and therefore plentiful resources.
4. This doesn’t even have to be true. Non-agricultural societies could have known a lot about natural sciences even if they didn’t develop agriculture.
5. The argument didn’t even say this, or imply it. How could it be the conclusion?

Recap: The question begins with “People cannot devote themselves to the study of”. It is a Complete the Argument question. Learn how to master LSAT Complete the Argument questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.

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.