Many nursing homes have prohibitions | LSAT 61, Q16, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Many nursing homes have prohibitions against having…

QUESTION TYPE: Identify the conclusion

CONCLUSION: We should get rid of the ban on pets in nursing homes.

REASONING: Pets provide benefits, such as lower stress and making time at home more pleasant. 

ANALYSIS: For identify the conclusion questions, you just have one job: figure out what the author is saying.

You don’t need to criticize the argument or try to improve it. Your job is really, really simple: find the conclusion.

Here, the author is saying we should get rid of the ban on pet ownership. The word “should” often indicates a conclusion. 

The rest of the argument is evidence supporting the conclusion. You can find the conclusion by asking if a sentence supports another or if a sentence is supported by other sentences.

___________

1. This isn’t the conclusion. The fact that increasing lifespans increases the importance of home time is evidence for the conclusion. 
2. This is a statement some might argue is true but it wasn’t in the argument. The author said pets should be allowed. They author did not say that all aspects of life need to be allowed in nursing homes.
   (I could imagine the structure of nursing homes makes some restrictions unavoidable – so the author might even disagree with this answer.
3. CORRECT. See the analysis above. The whole argument is aimed at supporting the idea that we should allow pets in nursing homes.
4. This is evidence supporting the argument that we should allow pets in nursing homes.
5. The argument didn’t talk about recognizing the benefits pets bring. The author argued that we should allow pets. There was no indication that people fail to recognize the benefits.

---