LSAT 116 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q11

LR Question 11 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Geneticist: Billions of dollars are spent each year on high-profile…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Strengthen

CONCLUSION: We should focus genetic research dollars on mundane and practical projects, rather than high profile but impractical projects.

ANALYSIS: This is already a fairly strong argument, and doesn’t need much help from us. Human genetic experiments are high profile, but they don’t really offer any benefits. More mundane genetic experiments offer many practical benefits.

The stimulus is implicitly assuming that we value practical benefits over other outcomes. But this isn’t always true: great art is rarely practical, but we value it highly. A principal that values practicality could strengthen this argument.

Note: Don’t focus too much on the plants. They were merely offered as an example. The conclusion talks about human genetic research vs. all other genetic research.

___________

1. This sounds nice, but it’s not a distinction made in the stimulus. It’s not clear that human genetic research helps anyone at all.
2. We only have information on edible plants, not all plants. Regardless, the conclusion is not about plants.
3. It’s not clear that human research helps prevent undesirable personality traits – it’s not very practical research. Also, the conclusion is much broader than malnutrition.
4. CORRECT. This does it. The stimulus argues we should favor practical experiments over those that are grandiose but impractical. This principle backs up that reasoning.
5. The conclusion isn’t talking about all experiments that don’t get media attention. It only refers to those that are practical.

Recap: The question begins with “Geneticist: Billions of dollars are spent each year on high-profile”. It is a Principle Justify question. Learn how to master LSAT Principle Justify questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.