LSAT 107 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q9

LR Question 9 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: The local agricultural official gave the fruit growers…

QUESTION TYPE: Strengthen

CONCLUSION: The official concluded that the new pesticide was better than the old pesticide at lowering the amount of fruit lost to insects, in the short run.

REASONING: Farmers tried the new pesticide for three years, and less fruit was lost to insects.

ANALYSIS: This sounds like a good argument. But a lot can change in three years. It’s much better to do a controlled experiment, where you compare both pesticides over the same period, under the same conditions.

To strengthen the argument, we need a comparison group of trees treated with the old pesticide.

___________

1. This doesn’t distinguish the peach trees from any other trees treated with the new pesticide.
2. That’s no good. The trees have both pesticides. We want trees that are treated only with the old pesticide.
3. CORRECT. Excellent. Now we can compare these pear trees with pear trees treated with the new pesticide. If the trees treated with the new pesticide performed better then we can say the official is likely correct.
4. That’s useless. The trees were in the wrong district and weren’t treated with any pesticide. The whole point of the argument was to compare two pesticides.
5. The trees are in the wrong district, and they’re treated with the wrong pesticide.

Recap: The question begins with “The local agricultural official gave the fruit growers”. It is a Strengthen question. Learn how to master LSAT Strengthen questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.