LSAT 106 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q8

LR Question 8 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Some environmentalists question the prudence of…

QUESTION TYPE: Must Be True

FACTS:

1. Some environmentalists point out that we can’t get economic benefits from forests, mountains, etc. if we destroy them.
2. Many environmentalists think we shouldn’t destroy nature, even if doing so does bring us economic value. Nature has intrinsic value that’s more important than economic value.

ANALYSIS: We don’t know much. We’re told two claims made by “some” and “many” environmentalists. We don’t know if the environmentalists’ claims are correct. The author isn’t making an argument.

We also don’t know if the two statements overlap. “Some” environmentalists could mean three guys in Switzerland, while “many” environmentalists could refer to members of a popular Brazilian environmental group.

“Some” and “Many” are very vague terms.

___________

1. This is only true if the environmentalists are right. We don’t know if they are.
2. CORRECT. This applies to the second group. They think that intrinsic value outweighs economic value.
3. We only know some environmentalists use economic reasons. That could be only 1-3% of environmentalists (for example).
4. Tempting. We know many environmentalists do provide a non-economic justification. But we don’t know they provide only a non-economic justification. They may have economic justifications, too.
5. This is only true if the second group of environmentalists is correct. We don’t know that.