LSAT 143 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q22

LR Question 22 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Librarian: Some argue that the preservation grant we…

QUESTION TYPE: Role in Argument

CONCLUSION: We shouldn’t spend the grant on restoring the original town charter.

REASONING: There are already copies of the town charter. We would be better off preserving documents with scholarly value. We’re a research library, not a museum.

ANALYSIS: There are two arguments in this question. The librarian first shows the opposing argument, then they criticize it – the word “but” shows that the author disagrees with the first sentence. (The opposing argument is “We should restore the town charter, or else it will soon be destroyed.”)

This question is asking about the second half of the first sentence “Since if….not restore….deteriorate beyond repair”. Here, the Librarian is stating the evidence of their opponents.

The librarian accepts this evidence, but disagrees about its importance and rejects the opposing argument’s conclusion. So, the role of the sentence is, roughly: “state the opposing evidence”.

___________

1. Sadly, the librarian did not dispute that the town charter will be destroyed. They’re arguing that the library’s limited resources should not be spent on restoring it – even if that means the charter will be ruined.
2. No. This is a fact in the argument that the author rejects. The conclusion of the rejected argument was that we should restore the charter.
3. CORRECT. The phrase this question is asking about comes after “since” and is followed by “but”. The “since” shows this phrase is evidence. The “but” shows that the author disagrees with the conclusion that comes before “since”.
4. The author disagrees with the first sentence. You can see this by the use of the word “but” in the second sentence.
5. The librarian is arguing that we should not restore the charter. If the charter will survive even without restoration work, then the argument is even stronger.